Virtual Library

Start Your Search

F. Barlesi

Author of

  • +

    Should we use newer generation targeted treatment upfront? (ID 10)

    • Event: ELCC 2017
    • Type: Controversy session
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      No (ID 40)

      09:15 - 10:15  |  Author(s): F. Barlesi

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Abstract not provided

      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.

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    Targeted therapies and immunotherapies (ID 46)

    • Event: ELCC 2017
    • Type: Poster Discussion session
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      89PD - Results from OAK subgroup analyses: A randomized Phase III study of atezolizumab vs docetaxel in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC (ID 317)

      14:45 - 15:45  |  Author(s): F. Barlesi

      • Abstract

      Atezolizumab (atezo) prevents binding of PD-L1 to its receptors PD-1 and B7.1, restoring tumor-specific T-cell immunity. Primary analysis of the Phase III OAK study in previously treated NSCLC showed superior survival with atezo vs docetaxel (doc) in the ITT population (mOS, 13.8 vs 9.6 months; HR, 0.73) and in pts expressing ≥1% PD-L1 on TC or IC (TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3; mOS, 15.7 vs 10.3; HR, 0.74). Here we present further subgroup analyses.

      OAK evaluated atezo vs doc in PD-L1 unselected NSCLC pts who had failed prior platinum-containing chemotherapy. Pts were stratified by PD-L1 expression, prior chemotherapy regimens and histology and randomized 1:1 to atezo (1200 mg) or doc (75 mg/m[2]) IV q3w. PD-L1 expression by IHC and mRNA was centrally evaluated by VENTANA SP142 IHC assay and Fluidigm, respectively. Data cutoff, July 7, 2016.

      In the first 850 of 1225 randomized pts (primary study population), OS was improved with atezo vs doc regardless of histology, and this benefit was seen across PD-L1 subgroups within each histology (Table). Similar OS was seen regardless of PD-L1 expression as assessed by mRNA and IHC. ORR was 14.4% vs 15.2% in non-squamous (non-sq) pts and 11.6% vs 8.2% (atezo vs doc) in squamous (sq) pts. Improved OS was seen with atezo vs doc across subgroups, including pts with treated baseline brain metastases (n = 85; mOS, 20.1 vs 11.9 mo; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.63, 0.89) and never smokers (n = 156; mOS, 16.3 vs 12.6 mo; HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47, 1.08). Further secondary endpoints and exploratory biomarker analyses for these subgroups and by age and EGFR/KRAS status will be presented.

      OAK demonstrated clinically relevant improvements with atezo in the ITT population, including in both histology subgroups, regardless of PD-L1 expression (measured by IHC or tumor gene expression), and among other subgroups, including never smokers and pts with baseline brain metastases.rnTable: 89PDrn

      rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn rnrn
      AtezoDocHR[a] 95% CI
      nMedian, monMedian, mo
      Non-sq population
      TC3 or IC34922.5478.70.35 (0.21, 0.61)
      TC2/3 or IC2/38918.79911.30.61 (0.42, 0.88)
      TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/317117.616211.30.72 (0.55, 0.95)
      TC0 and IC014014.015011.20.75 (0.57, 1.00)
      All non-sq31315.631511.20.73 (0.60, 0.89)
      Sq population
      TC3 or IC32317.51811.60.57 (0.27, 1.20)
      TC2/3 or IC2/34010.4379.70.76 (0.45, 1.29)
      TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3709.9608.70.71 (0.48, 1.06)
      TC0 and IC0407.6497.10.82 (0.51, 1.32)
      All sq1128.91107.70.73 (0.54, 0.98)
      rnaUnstratified HRs.rnTC, tumor cell; IC, tumor-infiltrating immune cell.rn

      Clinical trial identification:

      Legal entity responsible for the study:
      F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc., a member of the Roche Group

      F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc., a member of the Roche Group

      S.M. Gadgeel: Speaker\'s bureau from Astra-Zeneca, Genentech/Roche and Advisory Boards from Astra-Zeneca, Ariad, Pfizer, Bristol Myers- Squibb and Genentech/Roche. A. Rittmeyer: Grants as an advisor or speaker by Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Roche Genentech. F. Barlesi: Honarium from Roche. T. Hida: Corporate-sponsored research from Chugai Pharmaceutical. P. He: Employee of Roche/Genentech, and has stocks for Roche and Amgen. Her husband has stocks for Allergan and Gilead. M. Ballinger: Genentech/Roche employee and has Roche stock. D.R. Gandara: Consultant for Genentech and clinical trial grant from Genentech. J. von Pawel: Adboard with fees paid to the institution from AbbVie, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.