Johnston, Stephen

Abstract Background monarchE is a phase 3, open-label study evaluating abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) compared to ET alone in patients with node positive, HR+, HER2-, high risk early breast cancer (EBC) that resulted in a statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) at a pre-planned interim analysis. Following the positive interim analysis, patients continued to be followed for IDFS, distant recurrence, and overall survival. Methods After surgery and, as indicated, radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy, 5,637 patients with HR+, HER2-, high risk EBC were randomized (1:1) to standard of care adjuvant ET with or without abemaciclib (150 mg BD for 2 years). Patients with ≥4 positive nodes, or 1-3 nodes and either grade 3 disease, tumor size ≥5 cm, or central Ki-67 ≥20% were eligible. Here we present results of the primary outcome IDFS analysis which was planned after approximately 390 IDFS events. Results At the primary outcome analysis, median follow-up was approximately 19 months in both arms (an increase of 3.5 months from the interim analysis). A total of 1437 (25.5%) patients had completed the 2-year treatment period; 3281 (58.2%) were still in the 2-year treatment period. With 395 IDFS events observed in the intent-to-treat population, abemaciclib plus ET continued to demonstrate superior IDFS versus ET alone, with a 28.7% reduction in the risk of developing invasive disease (p=.0009; HR = 0.713; 95% CI = 0.583, 0.871). Two-year IDFS rates were 92.3% in the abemaciclib plus ET arm and 89.3% in the ET alone arm. There was a consistent benefit of abemaciclib in all prespecified subgroups. The addition of abemaciclib to ET also resulted in an improvement in distant relapse-free survival (DRFS). Overall survival was immature at the time of analysis. A key secondary endpoint was efficacy in patients with centrally assessed high Ki-67 (≥20%) (Ki-67H) (n=2498). Disease characteristics were well balanced between the arms of this population. Abemaciclib plus ET demonstrated superior IDFS vs ET alone, with a 30.9% reduction in risk of developing invasive disease (p=.0111; HR = 0.691; 95% CI = 0.519, 0.920) and 2-year IDFS rates of 91.6% and 87.1%, respectively. An improvement in DRFS treatment effect was also observed in the Ki-67H population. At the time of data cutoff, the median treatment duration of abemaciclib was 17.3 months and the median duration of ET was balanced between the arms (18.3 months in the abemaciclib arm and 18.7 months in the ET alone arm). Safety was consistent with the results at the interim IDFS analysis and with the known safety profile of abemaciclib. Conclusions At the primary outcome analysis, with a median follow-up of approximately 19 months, abemaciclib combined with ET continued to demonstrate a clinically meaningful improvement in IDFS in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high risk, EBC with a statistically significant improvement in IDFS in patients with central Ki-67 ≥20%. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03155997 Table 1: PrimaryOutcome EfficacyIntent-to-Treat PopulationIntent-to-Treat PopulationKi-67 ≥20% (Ki-67H) PopulationKi-67 ≥20% (Ki-67H) PopulationEndpointAbemaciclib + ET N=2808ET alone N=2829Abemaciclib + ET N=1262ET alone N=1236IDFS# events, n (%)163 (5.8)232 (8.2)82 (6.5)115 (9.3)log rank P value, HR (95% CI)p=.0009 0.713 (0.583, 0.871)p=.0111 0.691 (0.519, 0.920)Rate (%) at 2 years (95% CI)92.3 (90.9, 93.5)89.3 (87.7, 90.7)91.6 (89.4, 93.4)87.1 (84.3, 89.5)Difference (%) in 2-year rates (95% CI)3 (1.1, 5.0)4.5 (1.2, 7.7)DRFS# events, n (%)131 (4.7)193 (6.8)65 (5.2)102 (8.3)log rank P value, HR (95% CI)p=.0009 0.687 (0.551, 0.858)0.609 (0.445, 0.833)Rate (%) at 2 years (95% CI)93.8 (92.6, 94.9)90.8 (89.3, 92.1)93.6 (91.6, 95.1)88.5 (85.7, 90.7)Difference (%) in 2-year rates (95%CI)3 (1.2, 4.8)5.1 (2.1, 8.1) Citation Format: Joyce A. O'Shaughnessy, Stephen Johnston, Nadia Harbeck, Masakazu Toi, Young-Hyuck Im, Mattea Reinisch, Zhimin Shao, Pirkko Liisa Kellokumpu Lehtinen, Chiun-Sheng Huang, Alexey Tryakin, Matthew Goetz, Hope S Rugo, Elzbieta Senkus, Laura Testa, Michael Andersson, Kenji Tamura, Guenther G. Steger, Lucia Del Mastro, Joanne Cox, Tammy Forrester, Sarah Sherwood, Xuelin Li, Ran Wei, Miguel Martin, Priya Rastogi. Primary outcome analysis of invasive disease-free survival for monarchE: abemaciclib combined with adjuvant endocrine therapy for high risk early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-01.

Abstract Background MONARCH 3, a phase III trial (NCT02246621) of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC), previously demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival in patients receiving abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). This study evaluated patient-reported outcomes, including global health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functioning, and symptoms. Methods Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive abemaciclib (150 mg twice daily; n = 328) or placebo (n = 165), plus 1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole daily. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Breast Cancer–Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire HRQoL instruments were administered at baseline, every two cycles during cycles 2 through 19 (each cycle being 28 days), every three cycles thereafter, and once at a short-term posttherapy follow-up visit (approximately 30 days after discontinuation). Longitudinal mixed regression and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated postbaseline change and time to sustained deterioration (TTSD), respectively. Results Baseline scores were similar between treatment arms. Although select scores statistically favored the placebo arm, global HRQoL, most symptoms, and functioning scales did not meet the threshold for clinically meaningful differences between treatment arms. Only diarrhea favored the placebo arm with statistically and clinically meaningful differences. There were no TTSD differences between treatment arms for global HRQoL, most symptoms (except diarrhea), or functioning. Conclusion Over a 2-year period, there were no clinically meaningful differences in global HRQoL, functioning, and most symptoms for patients receiving abemaciclib plus NSAI compared with NSAI alone. Only diarrhea favored the placebo arm, consistent with prior safety data, which has been shown to be manageable and reversible. Combined with clinical efficacy, results support treatment with abemaciclib plus NSAI for postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC. Implications for Practice The addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) was not associated with a clinically meaningful detriment in patient-reported global health-related quality of life, functioning, and most symptoms in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Prior studies have also demonstrated clinical efficacy of abemaciclib plus NSAI compared with NSAI alone, including improved progression-free survival and objective response rate. These results also complement previously reported toxicity data, as measured by investigator-assessed adverse events. Taken together, these results support treatment with abemaciclib plus NSAI for postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC.

3519 Background: An understanding of the mechanisms of acquired resistance to CDK4 & 6 inhibitors, either alone or with endocrine therapy (ET), is an unmet need. Abemaciclib is a CDK4 & 6 inhibitor approved for treatment of HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). Here we evaluated acquired genomic alterations detected in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients (pts) treated with abemaciclib + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) or placebo + AI in MONARCH 3 or abemaciclib monotherapy in nextMONARCH 1. Methods: MONARCH 3 randomized postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC with no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting to abemaciclib (150 mg Q12H) or placebo + AI. nextMONARCH 1 randomized women with HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on or after prior ET and CT to abemaciclib (150 mg Q12H) + tamoxifen, abemaciclib (150 mg Q12H), or abemaciclib (200 mg Q12H) + loperamide. Plasma from pts in the abemaciclib or placebo + AI arms (MONARCH 3) or abemaciclib monotherapy arms (nextMONARCH 1) was analyzed by the Guardant360 assay to identify potential tumor-related genomic alterations including point mutations, indels, amplifications, and fusions acquired at EOT in comparison with baseline. Results: For MONARCH 3, commonly acquired alterations at EOT included ESR1 (17%), TP53 (10%), EGFR (8%), FGFR1 (7%), and PDGFRA (7%) in the abemaciclib + AI arm, and ESR1 (31%), TP53 (10%), and BRCA1 (7%) in the placebo + AI arm. Acquired alterations more frequent for abemaciclib + AI pts included RB1 (6%), MYC (5%), and AR (5%), compared to 0% in the placebo + AI arm (p = 0.008 RB1; p = 0.015 MYC or AR). In contrast, acquired ESR1 alterations were less frequent with abemaciclib + AI vs placebo + AI (17% vs 31%, p = 0.038). In nextMONARCH 1, the most commonly acquired alterations with abemaciclib monotherapy were in TP53 (10%), EGFR (9%), RB1 (9%), MYC (9%), and MET (8%). In addition, acquired alterations in ESR1 (6%) and AR (3%) were also found. PIK3CA alterations were not frequently acquired (abemaciclib + AI 1%, placebo + AI 6%, abemaciclib monotherapy 5%). Conclusions: Acquired genomic alterations potentially associated with emerging mechanisms of resistance to abemaciclib alone or in combination with AI may include RB1, MYC, or AR alterations, while the acquisition of ESR1 alterations was less common in pts treated with abemaciclib + AI compared to placebo + AI. These findings are hypothesis-generating and provide insight into mechanisms of resistance to abemaciclib vs ET. Clinical trial information: NCT02246621, NCT02747004 .

Abstract Background: Combination treatments of CDK4 & 6 inhibitors (CDK4 & 6i) with endocrine therapy (ET) have improved outcomes in patients with HR-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Aside from estrogen receptor positivity (ER+), predictive biomarkers of clinical benefit from CDK4 & 6i in combination with ET remain elusive. We assessed clinical outcomes by genomic alterations detected in baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients treated with abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) versus placebo plus NSAI in the Phase 3 study MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621). Methods: MONARCH 3 randomized 493 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC who had no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting to treatment with abemaciclib plus NSAI or placebo plus NSAI. Biomarker analysis of baseline ctDNA was an exploratory objective; plasma was analyzed by the Guardant360 next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based assay to identify potential tumor-related (i.e., somatic) genomic alterations including point mutations (SNV), indels, amplifications, and fusions in over 70 cancer-related genes. Genomic alterations detected in baseline ctDNA were associated with clinical outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results: Baseline ctDNA results were available for 295 patients (201 abemaciclib; 94 placebo) with 83% of patients harboring one or more detectable genomic alterations. Commonly altered genes of interest (% frequency) detected in baseline ctDNA included: PIK3CA (38%); TP53 (26%); EGFR (15%); FGFR1 (12%); NF1 (12%); MYC (9%); CCND1 (9%); ESR1 (5%).Overall, patients treated with placebo plus NSAI who harbored detectable ctDNA genomic alterations had shorter median PFS compared to patients without detectable genomic alterations, as shown in the Table (14.9 months [95% CI: 11.0-23.1] vs 19.2 months [95% CI 9.4-NR]). Moreover, genomic alterations in EGFR, FGFR1, MYC, and CCND1 were associated with median PFS <12 months with placebo plus NSAI. However, consistent with the intent-to-treat population, the addition of abemaciclib to NSAI benefitted these genomic subgroups, regardless of ctDNA gene alterations. Additional genomic results, including alterations in cell cycle-associated genes, will be presented. Conclusions: In this exploratory subgroup analysis, the presence of detectable ctDNA genomic alterations was associated with shorter PFS with placebo plus NSAI. Consistently, abemaciclib added to NSAI improved outcomes for genomically identified subgroups. In contrast to prior studies, there was no subgroup (e.g., patients harboring FGFR1 alterations) that did not derive benefit from abemaciclib, supporting the efficacy of abemaciclib, including in difficult to treat tumors. These findings are hypothesis-generating and warrant further investigations in clinical studies of CDK4 & 6i in combination with ET. TableAbemaciclib + NSAIPlacebo + NSAIEvents, n/NMedian PFS (95% CI)Events, n/NMedian PFS (95% CI)Hazard Ratio (95% CI)OVERALLITT population170 / 32828.2 (23.7 - 33.9)123 / 16514.8 (11.2 - 19.2)0.52 (0.42 - 0.66)TR population93 / 20138.7 (31.1 - NR)71 / 9416.5 (11.7 - 23.1)0.45 (0.33 - 0.61)Any Gene AlterationDetected83 / 16634.1 (27.2 - 40.0)62 / 7914.9 (11.0 - 23.1)0.47 (0.34 - 0.66)Not detected10 / 35NR (36.4 - NR)9 / 1519.2 (9.40 - NR)0.31 (0.13 - 0.78)TP53Detected29 / 5327.0 (14.1 - NR)19 / 2315.4 (5.7 - 30.4)0.53 (0.30 - 0.95)Not detected64 / 14839.9 (34.1 - NR)52 / 7117.5 (11.7 - 24.2)0.42 (0.29 - 0.60)EGFRDetected10 / 26NR (32.4 - NR)16 / 1710.9 (2.1 - 24.7)0.20 (0.09 - 0.47)Not detected83 / 17536.4 (27.7 - NR)55 / 7717.6 (14.6 - 25.5)0.52 (0.37 - 0.73)FGFR1Detected15 / 2532.8 (10.1 - NR)10 / 117.6 (1.9 - 15.4)0.37 (0.16 - 0.85)Not detected78 / 17639.9 (31.1 - NR)61 / 8319.2 (14.6 - 26.5)0.45 (0.32 - 0.63)NF1Detected10 / 2435.9 (27 - NR)8 / 1014.6 (1.6 - 33.4)0.33 (0.13 - 0.84)Not detected83 / 17738.7 (30.8 - NR)63 / 8417.5 (11.7 - 24.2)0.47 (0.33 - 0.65)MYCDetected11 / 1720.1 (5.5 - NR)9 / 106.5 (1.2 - 15.7)0.33 (0.13 - 0.86)Not detected82 / 18438.9 (32.9 - NR)62 / 8419.2 (14.6 - 26.5)0.45 (0.32 - 0.63)CCND1Detected8 / 1632.8 (5.5 - NR)10 / 107.2 (3.6 - 9.0)0.28 (0.10 - 0.77)Not detected85 / 18538.7 (31.1 - NR)61 / 8417.6 (14.6 - 25.5)0.48 (0.34 - 0.67)n = number of patients with events; N = total number of patients in the corresponding population and treatment arm; NR = not reached. TR population consists of patients in the ITT population from whom a valid baseline ctDNA result has been obtained. Citation Format: Matthew P Goetz, J. Thaddeus Beck, Mario Campone, Sara Hurvitz, Seock-Ah Im, Stephen Johnston, Antonio Llombart-Cussac, Miguel Martin, Joohyuk Sohn, Masakazu Toi, Lacey M Litchfield, Hillary T Graham, Hong Wang, Sameera R Wijayawardana, Valerie M Jansen, Angelo Di Leo. Efficacy of abemaciclib based on genomic alterations detected in baseline circulating tumor DNA from the MONARCH 3 study of abemaciclib plus nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-06.

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib plus nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (AI) demonstrated efficacy with a tolerable safety profile as initial treatment for postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− advanced breast cancer in the MONARCH 3 trial. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, the updated progression-free survival (PFS) with 12 months of additional follow-up was 28.2 versus 14.8 months (HR [95% CI]: 0.525 [0.415, 0.665]; p<.0001) in the abemaciclib plus AI versus placebo plus AI arms, respectively. Here we report data from the additional 12 months of follow-up on tumor response for the ITT population and exploratory subgroups previously identified as significantly prognostic (Di Leo et al. 2018). Methods: In MONARCH 3, a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 493 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− advanced breast cancer and no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting, received an AI (anastrozole or letrozole) plus abemaciclib or placebo. From the October 31, 2018 cutoff, secondary endpoints including objective response rate ([ORR], complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]), time to response (TTR), and duration of response ([DoR], time from a confirmed CR or PR until disease progression or death) were assessed in the ITT population and exploratory subgroups previously reported as significantly prognostic. Waterfall plots will be used to illustrate the magnitude of change in tumor size for each subgroup (to be presented). Results: In patients with measurable disease, the ORR was 62.5% (95% CI: 56.7, 68.2) in the abemaciclib plus AI arm and 44.7% (95% CI: 36.2, 53.2) in the placebo plus AI arm (p≤.001). Additional follow-up confirmed that all prognostic subgroups received benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to AI, consistent with the ITT population, as evidenced by change in ORR, with the largest effects observed in subgroups of patients with liver metastases, progesterone receptor-negative tumors, high grade tumors, or treatment-free interval of <36 months (Table). Median TTR was similar between the two treatment arms (abemaciclib plus AI: 3.62 months; placebo plus AI: 3.65 months), and this was generally consistent across subgroups. Responses were more durable in the abemaciclib plus AI arm (median DoR: 32.71 months; 95% CI: 25.74, -) versus the placebo plus AI arm (median DoR: 17.49 months; 95% CI: 11.61, 22.19), including in poor prognostic subgroups. Conclusions: Extended follow-up in the MONARCH 3 trial further confirmed that the addition of abemaciclib to AI is associated with durable tumor responses, including those in patients with clinically poor prognostic characteristics. References: Di Leo A et al. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2018;4:41. Clinical trial information: NCT02246621 This study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company Table: Objective Response RateAbemaciclib + AIPlacebo + AIORR ChangeNn (%)Nn (%)%Measurable disease population269168 (62.5)13259 (44.7)17.8Liver metastasesYes4727 (57.45)306 (20.00)37.45No222141 (63.51)10253 (51.96)11.55Progesterone receptor statusNegative6137 (60.66)298 (27.59)33.07Positive206130 (63.11)10351 (49.51)13.60Treatment-free interval<36 months3117 (54.84)225 (22.73)32.11≥36 months7442 (56.76)3216 (50.00)6.76Tumor gradeHigh5739 (68.42)2811 (39.29)29.13Intermediate/ Low13992 (66.19)7535 (46.67)19.52ECOG PS111275 (66.96)5022 (44.00)22.96015793 (59.24)8237 (45.12)14.12Bone-only diseaseNo256162 (63.28)12253 (43.44)19.84YesNA*NA*NA*NA*NA*N= total number of patients in each subgroup; n= number of responder patients; NA=not applicable*Response rate not reported for bone-only disease because majority of lesions were not measurable Citation Format: Joyce O’Shaughnessy, Stephen Johnston, Miguel Martin, Jens Huober, Masakazu Toi, Valerie AnneMarie Andre, Holly Rene Martin, Molly Catherine Hardebeck, Angelo Di Leo, Matthew Philip Goetz. Updated subgroup tumor response of abemaciclib plus aromatase inhibitor for hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative advanced breast cancer (MONARCH 3) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-19-09.

Abstract Background: A recent exploratory subgroup analysis pooling data from over 1000 patients (pts) in MONARCH 2 (final analysis) and MONARCH 3 (interim analysis) demonstrated that pts with clinical characteristics that predict for worse outcome (e.g. liver metastases, progesterone receptor [PgR]-negative status, high-grade tumors) received the largest benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to endocrine therapy (ET). There is also interest in determining the extent to which abemaciclib improves progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with favorable prognostic factors (e.g. bone-only disease, long treatment-free interval [TFI]). Here we present an update of the subgroup analyses of the MONARCH 3 study using data from the preplanned final PFS analysis. Methods: Enrollment criteria and study designs were previously described (Sledge et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017; Goetz et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017). An exploratory pooled analysis was conducted using data from MONARCH 2 (NCT02107703) and the MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621) preplanned final PFS analysis to identify significant prognostic factors regardless of therapy received. Using the updated MONARCH 3 data, PFS and objective response rate (ORR) (in pts with measurable disease) were examined within the prognostic subgroups that had been previously identified as being statistically significant. Additionally, subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) methodology was used to evaluate the association between TFI following adjuvant ET and outcomes of NSAI alone or with abemaciclib. Results: Assessment of clinical factors from MONARCH 2 and MONARCH 3 (final PFS data) confirmed that the following factors remained significantly prognostic regardless of treatment received: bone-only disease, liver metastases, tumor grade, PgR status, and ECOG performance status. In MONARCH 3, prognosis was poor in pts with liver metastases, PgR-negative tumors, and high-grade tumors. While all subpopulations benefited from the addition of abemaciclib to ET regardless of prognosis, pts with these three poor prognostic factors received substantial benefit from abemaciclib, with PFS hazard ratios (HR) ranging from 0.4 to 0.5 and with differential improvement in ORR typically >30%. Furthermore, STEPP analysis of TFI (on the MONARCH 3 pts who had received adjuvant ET) demonstrated that pts who had a shorter TFI had a worse prognosis and received relatively greater benefit from abemaciclib plus NSAI than did pts with a longer TFI. Patients with bone-only disease or a long TFI also received benefit from abemaciclib, but to a relatively lesser extent (HR ranging from approximately 0.6 to 0.8). Conclusions: This exploratory analysis of the preplanned final PFS data from MONARCH 3 confirms previous findings that pts with poor prognostic factors may receive relatively greater benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to ET. Citation Format: Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Matthew P. Goetz, George W. Sledge, Miguel Martin, Yong Lin, Tammy Forrester, Ian C. Smith, Angelo Di Leo, Stephen Johnston. The benefit of abemaciclib in prognostic subgroups: An update to the pooled analysis of MONARCH 2 and 3 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT099.

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is an orally administered, selective CDK4 & 6 inhibitor dosed on a continuous schedule. In patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC), abemaciclib demonstrated clinical activity as monotherapy in MONARCH 1 and efficacy with a generally tolerable safety profile in combination with fulvestrant in MONARCH 2. At the MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621) interim analysis, abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.543; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.409, 0.723; p=.000021) and objective response rate (ORR) (measurable disease: abemaciclib arm, 59.2%; placebo arm, 43.8%; p=.004) with a generally tolerable safety profile as initial treatment for HR+, HER2- ABC. Here we present the MONARCH 3 results from the preplanned final PFS analysis. Methods: MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, Phase 3 study of abemaciclib/placebo (150 mg, twice daily continuous schedule) + NSAI (1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily) in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC who have had no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. Endocrine therapy (ET) naïve pts or pts with disease relapse >12 months after (neo)adjuvant ET were randomized 2:1 and stratified by metastatic site (visceral, bone-only, or other) and prior ET (aromatase inhibitor, no ET, or other). The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS. Additional objectives included ORR, clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DoR), overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. The study was powered to 80% at 1-sided α=.025 assuming a HR of 0.67 in favor of abemaciclib + NSAI, with the final analysis at 240 PFS events. Results: 493 pts were randomized to abemaciclib + NSAI (n=328) or placebo + NSAI (n=165). At the final PFS analysis, 246 PFS events had occurred. Abemaciclib + NSAI significantly extended PFS (HR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.418, 0.698; p=.000002; median: abemaciclib arm, 28.18 vs placebo arm, 14.76 months). PFS was improved across all subgroups. For pts with measurable disease, the ORR was 61.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 45.5% in the placebo arm (p=.003), and the CBR was 79.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 69.7% in the placebo arm (p=.037). The median DoR was 27.39 months in the abemaciclib arm compared to 17.46 months in the placebo arm. OS was immature at the time of analysis. Adverse events were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: Abemaciclib + NSAI demonstrated a generally tolerable safety profile and was an effective initial treatment for pts with HR+, HER2- ABC, significantly improving PFS and ORR. Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Miguel Martin, Angelo Di Leo, Seock-Ah Im, Ahmad Awada, Tammy Forrester, Martin Frenzel, Joanne Cox, Susana Barriga, Masakazu Toi, Hiroji Iwata, Stephen Johnston. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib as initial therapy for patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer - Results from the preplanned final PFS analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT040.

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is an orally administered, selective inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 & 6 that is dosed on a twice daily continuous schedule. Abemaciclib has demonstrated clinical efficacy with a generally tolerable safety profile in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer in combination with fulvestrant in MONARCH 2 (NCT02107703) and in combination with non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAI) in MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621). These analyses were conducted to evaluate if patient and disease characteristics may better inform in whom and when abemaciclib should be initiated to define optimal treatment strategies. Methods: MONARCH 2 and 3 enrolled patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer. In MONARCH 2, patients whose disease had progressed while receiving endocrine therapy were treated with abemaciclib/placebo plus fulvestrant. In MONARCH 3, patients were treated with abemaciclib/placebo plus NSAI as initial therapy for advanced disease. An exploratory pooled analysis of the two studies was performed to determine significant prognostic factors. Efficacy results (progression-free survival [PFS] and objective response rate [ORR] in patients with measurable disease) were examined for patient subgroups corresponding to each of the identified significant prognostic factors. Subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) methodology was performed to examine the association between treatment-free interval (TFI) following adjuvant endocrine therapy and outcomes of endocrine therapy alone or in combination with abemaciclib in MONARCH 3. Results: Analyses of clinical factors in over 1000 patients confirmed the following to have prognostic value: bone-only disease, liver metastases, tumor grade, progesterone receptor (PgR) status, and ECOG performance status. Prognosis was poor in patients with liver metastases, PgR-negative tumors, and high-grade tumors. While all subpopulations benefited from the addition of abemaciclib to endocrine therapy regardless of prognosis, substantial benefit of abemaciclib was observed in poor prognosis subgroups, characterized by large increases in PFS (hazard ratios = 0.4 to 0.5) and ORR (over 30%). In addition, STEPP analysis of TFI on a subset of the MONARCH 3 population showed that patients with the shortest TFI appeared to have a poorer prognosis and received more benefit from the addition of abemaciclib compared to patients with longer TFI. Conclusions: This exploratory analysis has provided data that could help optimize treatment strategies by identifying that patients with poor prognostic factors may receive greater benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to endocrine therapy. Citation Format: Goetz MP, O'Shaughnessy J, Sledge Jr. GW, Martin M, Lin Y, Forrester T, Mockbee C, Smith IC, Di Leo A, Johnston S. The benefit of abemaciclib in prognostic subgroups: An exploratory analysis of combined data from the MONARCH 2 and 3 studies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS6-02.

Abstract Background: Preclinical and clinical data indicate a key role for the PI3-kinase (PI3K) pathway in the pathogenesis of resistance to endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive (HR) breast cancer (BC) and suggest that combining PI3K inhibitors with endocrine therapy may partially overcome this resistance. FERGI is the first randomized Phase II study testing pictilisib (GDC-0941), a PI3K inhibitor, in combination with fulvestrant to evaluate this hypothesis in MBC patients with and without PIK3CA-mutant tumors. Methods: 168 post-menopausal pts with ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC were randomized (1:1) to receive fulvestrant with either pictilisib 340 mg QD (n=89, "combination" arm) or matching placebo (n=79, "control" arm). To be eligible, pts had to have relapsed during or within 6 mos of completing adjuvant AI treatment or have progressed on an AI for MBC. Pts were stratified based on tumor PIK3CA mutation status, resistance to prior AI therapy and presence of measurable disease. The primary endpoint was PFS by investigator assessment in the intent-to-treat (ITT) group and in pts with centrally confirmed PIK3CA-mutant tumors. The primary analysis was based on a 6 mo median duration follow up. Results: Baseline disease and prior treatment characteristics were similar between study arms. Observed treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with those previously described for single agent pictilisib and fulvestrant (primary toxicities were rash and GI disorders). In the ITT population (84 events) the median PFS (mPFS) was 6.2 mo in the combination arm vs 3.8 months for the control arm (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50-1.19). For pts with PIK3CA-mutant tumors (37 events), mPFS was 6.2 mo in the combination arm vs 5.1 mo in the control arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.48-1.76). For pts without a detectable PIK3CA mutant tumor (43 events), mPFS was 5.8 months in the combination arm vs 3.6 months in the control arm (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.17). Exploratory post-hoc subgroup analysis suggested improvement in PFS in pts with ER+ and PR+ tumors (centrally confirmed) treated with pictilisib plus fulvestrant. In the ER+/PR+ subgroup (57 events) mPFS was 7.2 mo in the combination arm vs 3.7 mo in the control arm (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.78). This improvement was independent of tumor PIK3CA mutation status. Multivariate analysis suggests that this treatment effect in pts with ER+/PR+ tumors is maintained after adjusting for possible baseline imbalances. A similar analysis on pts with luminal A tumors (per PAM50 analysis) was also consistent with the findings in pts ER+/PR+ disease. Conclusions: This is the first report of a blinded, randomized clinical study evaluating a PI3K inhibitor in pts with MBC. In the ITT population, the addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant was associated with a mPFS improvement of 3.8 mo to 6.2 mo. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested in pts with ER+/PR+ tumors are more likely to derive benefit from the addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant irrespective of PIK3CA mutation status, though the subgroup analyses are limited by the sample size. Additional biomarker analyses will be reported. Citation Format: Ian Krop, Stephen Johnston, Ingrid A Mayer, Maura Dickler, Vinod Ganju, Andres Forero-Torres, Bohuslav Melichar, Serafin Morales, Richard de Boer, Steven Gendreau, Mika Derynck, Mark Lackner, Jill Spoerke, Ru-Fang Yeh, Gallia Levy, Vivian Ng, Carol O'Brien, Heidi Savage, Yuanyuan Xiao, Timothy Wilson, Soo Chin Lee, Katarina Petrakova, Susanne Vallentin, Denise Yardley, Matthew Ellis, Martine Piccart, Edith A Perez, Eric Winer, Peter Schmid. The FERGI phase II study of the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) plus fulvestrant vs fulvestrant plus placebo in patients with ER+, aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant advanced or metastatic breast cancer – Part I results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr S2-02.