Virtual Library
Start Your Search
G. Blumenschein
Author of
-
+
OA 02 - Mesothelioma: Challenges For New Treatment (ID 653)
- Event: WCLC 2017
- Type: Oral
- Track: Mesothelioma
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:S. Hasegawa, Anna Nowak
- Coordinates: 10/16/2017, 11:00 - 12:30, F205 + F206 (Annex Hall)
-
+
OA 02.01 - Randomized Phase II Study of Anetumab Ravtansine or Vinorelbine in Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (ID 9377)
11:00 - 12:30 | Author(s): G. Blumenschein
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Anetumab ravtansine (BAY 94-9343) is a novel fully human anti-mesothelin IgG1 antibody conjugated to the maytansinoid tubulin inhibitor DM4. We report the results of a randomized phase II trial of anetumab ravtansine compared to vinorelbine in patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) who have high mesothelin expression and have progressed on platinum/pemetrexed-based first-line chemotherapy (NCT02610140).
Method:
Patients (≥18 years) with locally advanced or metastatic MPM with progressive disease following first-line treatment with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab, were eligible. Patients were pre-screened based on obligatory tumor staining for mesothelin as determined by the Ventana MSLN (SP74) immunohistochemistry assay. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per central radiologic review using modified RECIST criteria for MPM. Secondary objectives included overall survival, tumor response, and safety. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to anetumab ravtansine 6.5 mg/kg Q3W IV or vinorelbine 30 mg/m[2] QW IV.
Result:
A total of 166 patients were randomized to anetumab ravtansine and 82 to vinorelbine; 3 and 10 patients, respectively, not receiving treatment were included for efficacy but not safety assessments. The treatment arms were evenly balanced, with 73% male, 64% ECOG performance status 1, 96% epithelioid histology, and a mean 2.5 (±2.4) months since last progression. The median duration of treatment (anetumab vs vinorelbine) was 12.6 weeks (range 3-61) vs 13.0 weeks (range 1-43). Treatment-emergent grade (G) ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were seen in 85 (52.1%) and 53 (73.6%) of patients, respectively. G3/G4 neutropenia (22.2%/16.7%) occurred in the vinorelbine arm whereas corneal epitheliopathy (39.3% all grade, 1.8% G3) was distinct for the anetumab ravtansine arm. Serious AEs (any grade) were similar; 52 (31.9%) vs 25 (34.7%). Treatment-emergent AEs leading to dose modification were 42.9% in the anetumab ravtansine arm and 80.6% in the vinorelbine arm. There was one treatment-related G5 event in each arm. Median PFS was 4.3 months (95% CI:4.1, 5.2) for anetumab ravtansine vs 4.5 months (4.1, 5.8) for vinorelbine; hazard ratio 1.22 (0.85, 1.74), p=0.859. Fourteen (8.4%) patients in the anetumab ravtansine arm had an objective response vs 5 (6.1%) in the vinorelbine arm, with no complete responses. Interim median overall survival was 10.1 mo (7.6, -) vs 11.6 mo (7.7, 12.5), respectively, p-value 0.721.
Conclusion:
In relapsed MPM, anetumab ravtansine was not superior to vinorelbine with respect to PFS.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
OA 12 - Emerging Genomic Targets (ID 679)
- Event: WCLC 2017
- Type: Oral
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:H. Akita, Maurice Pérol
- Coordinates: 10/18/2017, 11:00 - 12:30, F203 + F204 (Annex Hall)
-
+
OA 12.01 - The Preclinical and Clinical Activity of Poziotinib, a Potent, Selective Inhibitor of EGFR Exon 20 Mutant NSCLC (ID 10369)
11:00 - 12:30 | Author(s): G. Blumenschein
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Approximately 10% of EGFR mutant NSCLCs have an insertion/mutation in exon 20 of EGFR resulting in primary resistance to currently available tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We previously reported that the structural features of poziotinib could potentially enable it to circumvent the steric hindrance induced by exon 20 mutations. Here we further characterize the preclinical activity of poziotinib and report on initial clinical activity of poziotinib in patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations from an ongoing phase II study.
Method:
We evaluated poziotinib activity in vitro using human NSCLC cell lines and the BAF3 model as well as several patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models and genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) of exon 20 insertion. We launched a phase 2 investigator-initiated trial of poziotinib in patients with metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions (NCT03066206).
Result:
In vitro poziotinib was approximately 100x more potent than osimertinib and 40x more potent than afatinib against a common panel of EGFR exon 20 insertions. Furthermore, it had ~65-fold greater potency against common exon 20 insertions compared with EGFR T790M mutations; 3[rd] generation inhibitors osimertinib, EGF816, and rociletinib were all significantly less potent for exon 20 mutations/insertions compared with T790M. in vivo poziotinib led to >85% reduction in tumor burden in GEM models of EGFR exon 20 insertion (D770insNPG) NSCLC and the PDX model LU0387 (H773insNPH). To date, 8 platinum-refractory patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation metastatic NSCLC have been enrolled in the clinical trial and treated with poziotinib at a dose of 16 mg PO daily. Two patients have reached the first interval-imaging time point (at 8 weeks of therapy per protocol). Both patients exhibited dramatic partial response, with one patient reporting improvement in dyspnea and cough at one week of therapy. In this early stage of the study, one case of grade 3 paronchycia was observed. One additional platinum- and erlotinib-refractory patient with EGFR exon 20 insertion was treated with poziotinib on compassionate basis. The patient achieved partial response after three weeks of treatment.
Conclusion:
Poziotinib has selective activity against EGFR exon 20 mutations and potent activity in cell lines, PDX, and GEM models. Three platinum-refractory patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations have been treated thus far and are evaluable for response; all three had partial responses at the time of the initial scan. Updated data from the ongoing phase 2 clinical trial of poziotinib will be presented at the meeting.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
P3.07 - Immunology and Immunotherapy (ID 723)
- Event: WCLC 2017
- Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
- Track: Immunology and Immunotherapy
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 10/18/2017, 09:30 - 16:00, Exhibit Hall (Hall B + C)
-
+
P3.07-012 - Nivolumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Liver Metastases (ID 8484)
09:30 - 16:00 | Author(s): G. Blumenschein
- Abstract
Background:
Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have metastasis to the liver have poor prognosis. The phase 3 trials CheckMate 017 and 057 demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with nivolumab, an anti-programmed death-1 antibody, versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous and non-squamous NSCLC, respectively. A prior subgroup analysis from these trials evaluated and demonstrated efficacy and safety with nivolumab in patients with asymptomatic central nervous system metastases (Goldman J. ASCO 2016). Here we report subgroup analyses from these trials of patients with baseline liver metastases.
Method:
In both trials, patients were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m[2] every 3 weeks until progression or discontinuation. The primary endpoint of each study was OS. Patients from CheckMate 017 and 057 with baseline liver metastases reported as either target or non-target lesions were identified and pooled across studies by treatment.
Result:
Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients with liver metastases randomized to nivolumab (n=99) and docetaxel (n=94). In the nivolumab group, 26% of patients had squamous and 74% had non-squamous NSCLC; in the docetaxel group, 36% had squamous and 64% had non-squamous NSCLC. The minimum follow-up was 24.2 months (Feb 2016 database locks). Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio [HR]=0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50, 0.91), similar to findings from the ITT group (HR=0.72; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.84). Median OS in patients with liver metastases was 6.83 months with nivolumab versus 5.93 months with docetaxel, both of which were lower than those observed in the overall pooled intent-to-treat (ITT) population (11.14 months vs 8.11 months). Two-year OS rates were 18% with nivolumab versus 6% with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases. Rates of grade 3−4 treatment-related adverse events in patients with liver metastases were lower with nivolumab compared with docetaxel (7% vs 53%), and similar to those in the ITT population (10% vs 55%).
Conclusion:
The lower median OS observed in this subgroup of patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC and baseline liver metastases corroborates previous findings that metastasis to the liver is an unfavorable prognostic factor. However, nivolumab demonstrated sustained OS benefit versus docetaxel in these patients, similar to the ITT population. The safety profile of nivolumab was favorable versus docetaxel in this subgroup, with no new safety concerns identified.
