Virtual Library

 x 
My Library Virtual Library FAQ

Start Your Search

D.R. Gandara



Author of

  • +

    Immunotherapies and targeted therapies in advanced NSCLC (ID 39)

    • Event: ELCC 2017
    • Type: Proffered Paper session
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      83O - A phase II study of durvalumab (MEDI4736) for previously treated patients with stage IV squamous NSCLC (SqNSCLC): Lung-MAP Sub-study SWOG S1400A (ID 279)

      14:45 - 16:15  |  Author(s): D.R. Gandara

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Durvalumab (MEDI4736) is an engineered human IgG1 mAb targeting programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1). Treatment with other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies has demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit in patients with advanced NSCLC.

      Methods:
      As part of the Lung Master Protocol S1400, a National Clinical Trials Network group "umbrella" trial for second-line SqNSCLC we conducted a phase II study of durvalumab in patients with Stage IV squamous NSCLC (ECOG PS 0-2; ≥1 prior systemic treatment regimens, including one platinum-based), EGFR/ALK wild-type. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) (RECIST v1.1); secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), ORR among PD-L1 positive patients, disease control rate (DCR), investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety (CTCAE v4.03). The initial protocol was a randomized phase II/III comparison of durvalumab to docetaxel, and was amended to be a single arm phase II trial of single agent durvalumab. PD-L1 positive tumors were defined by ≥ 25% of tumor cells with membrane staining.

      Results:
      Of the 68 eligible patients (median [range] age 66 [35-92] years, PS 0/1/2 26%/62%/12%), 11 were responders (16% ORR, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 7%, 25%). DCR was 54% (CI 43%, 66%), median OS was 11.5 months (CI 10.1-12.4 mos), and median PFS was 2.9 mos (CI 2.0-4.1 mos). Of the 11 responders, median time to response and DoR were 3.6 mos (CI 2.8-4.2 mos) and 18.6 months (95% CI 4.4-NR mos), respectively. Of the 14 PDL1-positive patients, 2 were responders (14% ORR, 95% CI 0%, 33%), DCR was 57% (CI 31%, 83%), median OS and PFS were 10.7 mos (CI 9.2-10.7 mos) and 2.3 mos (CI 1.4-4.9 mos), respectively. Durvalumab showed a manageable safety and tolerability profile; most adverse events (AEs) were low grade and resolved with treatment delay and/or immunosuppressive interventions. Grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs occurred in 23(34%) of patients. Drug-related AEs led to discontinuation in 6 patients (9%, 95% CI 2%, 16%).

      Conclusions:
      Durvalumab demonstrated clinical benefit and durable responses in a previously treated metastatic NSCLC population with manageable toxicity profile. Results are comparable with other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies in metastatic, relapsed NSCLC.

      Clinical trial identification:
      NCT02766335

      Legal entity responsible for the study:
      Southwest Oncology Group/NCTN

      Funding:
      Lung-MAP supported in part by NIH/NCI grants CA180888, CA180819, CA180820, CA180821, CA180868, and by Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Genentech and Pfizer through the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health, in partnership with Friends of Cancer Research.

      Disclosure:
      V. Papadimitrakopoulou: Advisory Role for: Eli Lilly&Co, Genentech, Janssen Global Sevices, Bristol-Myers Squibb, ARIAD, Astra Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Merck Corporate-sponsored research: Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Genentech, Merck, Janssen, ACEA, Bristol-Myers Squibb. H. Borghaei: Advisory: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Genentech, Celgene, Pfizer, EMD-Serono, Boerhinger-Ingelheim, Trovagene, AstraZeneca, Research Support: Millenium, Merck, Celgene. K. Kelly: Advisory: Synta, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Clovis Oncology, ARIAD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, G1 Therapeutics. Research: Millenium, Novartis, EMD Serono, Lilly, Genentech, Abbvie, Gilead, Celgene, Five Prime Therapeutics, Transgene. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

      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): D.R. Gandara

      • Abstract

      Background:
      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.

      Methods:
      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.

      Results:
      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.

      Conclusions:
      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
      rnOS
      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:
      NCT02008227

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

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

      Disclosure:
      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.