Virtual Library
Start Your Search
S. Capici
Author of
-
+
P1.06 - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 458)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/05/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P1.06-006 - Treatment beyond Progression in Patients with Advanced Squamous NSCLC Participating in the Expanded Access Programme (EAP) (ID 5450)
14:30 - 15:45 | Author(s): S. Capici
- Abstract
Background:
Response patterns of immunotherapies differ from those seen with other therapies approved for the treatment of tumors. Due to this reason, immunotherapy protocols generally allow patients (pts) to continue treatment beyond investigator-assessed radiographic progressive disease (PD) as long as there is ongoing clinical benefit, but to date no data has been reported regarding treatment beyond PD in routine clinical practice. Here we report the analysis about the subgroup of pts treated beyond initial PD in the italian cohort of nivolumab EAP for pts with squamous non small cell lung cancer (Sq-NSCLC).
Methods:
Nivolumab was available upon physician request for pts aged ≥18 years who had relapsed after a minimum of one prior systemic treatment for stage IIIB/stage IV Sq-NSCLC. Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was administered intravenously every 2 weeks to a maximum of 24 months. Pts included in the analysis had received ≥ 1 dose of nivolumab and were monitored for adverse events (AE) using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Patients were allowed to continue treatment beyond initial PD as long as they met the following criteria: investigator-assessed clinical benefit, absence of rapid PD, tolerance of program drug, stable performance status and no delay of an imminent intervention to prevent serious complications of PD.
Results:
With a median follow-up of 5.2 months (range 0-12.9), 363 pts were evaluable for response. Prior to first progression, the objective response rate (ORR) was 14%, with 1 complete response (CR) and 50 (14%) partial responses (PR), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 41%. Sixty-six pts were treated beyond RECIST defined progression, with 23 pts obtaining a non-conventional benefit, meaning a subsequent tumor reduction or stabilization in tumor lesions. In particular, 17 pts obtained a SD and 6 pts obtained a PR. As to July 2016, median overall survival in these pts had not been reached (95% CI: 3.2-4.6) and 6 months and 12 months OS were 75% and 53%, respectively. The safety profile was consistent to what already observed in the general population.
Conclusion:
As already observed in clinical trials, these preliminary EAP data seem to confirm that a proportion of pts who continued treatment beyond PD demonstrated sustained reduction or stabilization of tumor burden, with an acceptable safety profile. Further investigations are warranted in order to better define and identify pts who can benefit from treatment beyond progression.
