Virtual Library
Start Your Search
B. Piperdi
Author of
-
+
MA 02 - Emerging Targets (ID 656)
- Event: WCLC 2017
- Type: Mini Oral
- Track: Clinical Design, Statistics and Clinical Trials
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:Ravi Salgia, Shun Lu
- Coordinates: 10/16/2017, 11:00 - 12:30, Room 511 + 512
-
+
MA 02.02 - Phase 2 Study of Pembrolizumab Plus CC-486 vs Pembrolizumab Plus Placebo in Previously Treated Patients with Advanced NSCLC (ID 8581)
11:00 - 12:30 | Author(s): B. Piperdi
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Studies have demonstrated that epigenetic modifiers, such as azacitidine, may sensitize tumor cells to treatment with checkpoint inhibitors, such as pembrolizumab (pembro). Efficacy and safety results from a phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pembro in combination with CC-486, an oral formulation of azacitidine, vs pembro+placebo (PBO) for 2L treatment of advanced NSCLC are reported.
Method:
Patients aged ≥ 18 years with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with only 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 (stratified by histology) to pembro 200 mg day 1 plus either CC-486 300 mg or placebo days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. Primary endpoint was PFS. Key secondary endpoints included OS, ORR and safety.
Result:
51 and 49 patients were randomized to the pembro+CC-486 and pembro+PBO arms. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between treatment groups. Efficacy results are shown in Table 1. Median duration of treatment for pembro+CC-486 vs pembro+PBO was 14 vs 24 weeks, and median number of cycles was 5 vs 7. The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs associated with pembro+CC-486 were nausea (14%), vomiting (12%), asthenia (10%), and diarrhea (8%), vs diarrhea (6%), asthenia (6%) and pneumonia (6%) with pembro+PBO. Patients treated with pembro+CC-486 vs pembro+PBO experienced a higher rate of pembro dose interruptions (29% vs 16%) and discontinuations (20% vs 10%), and a higher rate of CC-486 or PBO dose interruptions (61% vs 24%) and discontinuations (33% vs 12%). Gastrointestinal events, asthenia/fatigue, and elevated transaminase levels were the most common TEAEs leading to discontinuations.
Conclusion:
The addition of CC-486 to pembro did not improve the primary endpoint of PFS compared with pembro+PBO. PD-L1 expression did not appear to be predictive of CC-486 treatment efficacy. The increase in TEAEs in the combination arm, particularly gastrointestinal (nausea and vomiting), which are known to be associated with CC-486, may have influenced treatment exposure.Efficacy Endpoints Pembro + CC-486 n = 51 Pembro + PBO n = 49 Overall PFS, median, months 3.1 4.0 ORR, n (%) 10 (19.6) 7 (14.3) By PD-L1 Level at Baseline n = 45 n = 44 PFS, median, months ≥ 50% ≥ 1%-49% 0% 5.5 1.6 3.6 8.0 1.4 3.9 ORR, % ≥ 50% ≥ 1%-49% 0% 37.5 20.0 18.5 37.5 0.0 7.1
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.
