Virtual Library

Start Your Search

Y. Ohe



Author of

  • +

    ESMO-IASLC Best Abstracts (ID 61)

    • Event: ELCC 2018
    • Type: Best Abstract session
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      128O - Osimertinib vs standard of care (SoC) EGFR-TKI as first-line therapy in patients (pts) with untreated EGFRm advanced NSCLC: FLAURA post-progression outcomes (ID 570)

      16:45 - 18:30  |  Author(s): Y. Ohe

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      In the FLAURA phase 3 study, the third-generation EGFR-TKI osimertinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs SoC EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib or erlotinib) in pts with previously untreated Ex19del/L858R (EGFRm) advanced NSCLC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46 [95% CI 0.37, 0.57]; p < 0.001). Interim overall survival (OS) data was encouraging but not formally statistically significant (HR 0.63 [95% CI 0.45, 0.88]; p = 0.007). Here we report exploratory post-progression outcomes.

      Methods:
      Pts were randomised 1:1 to receive osimertinib (80 mg orally [PO], once daily [QD]) or SoC (gefitinib 250 mg PO QD or erlotinib 150 mg PO QD). Treatment beyond disease progression was allowed if the investigator judged continued clinical benefit; investigators determined subsequent therapy. Pts receiving SoC could cross over to osimertinib after objective disease progression with documented post-progression T790M-positive mutation status.

      Results:
      At data cutoff, 12 June 2017, 138/279 (49%) and 213/277 (77%) pts discontinued osimertinib and SoC, respectively; 82 (29%) and 129 (47%) received a subsequent treatment: EGFR-TKI-containing, 29 (10%) and 97 (35%; 55 [20%] osimertinib); platinum chemotherapy-containing, 46 (16%) and 27 (10%). Median time (mths) to discontinuation of study treatment or death: osimertinib 20.8 (95% CI 17.2, 24.1) vs SoC 11.5 (10.3, 12.8). Median time (mths) to discontinuation of any EGFR-TKI (study treatment and subsequent EGFR-TKI, not interrupted by non-EGFR-TKI therapy) or death: osimertinib 23.0 (19.5, not calculable [NC]) vs SoC 16.0 (14.8, 18.6). Time-to-event post-progression endpoints all favoured osimertinib (Table).

      Osimertinib(n = 279)SoC (n = 277)
      Disease progression or death, n (%)136 (49)206 (74)
      Remained on study treatment for at least 7 days post investigator assessed progression, n/N (%)91/136 (67)145/206 (70)
      Median duration on study treatment post-progression (95% CI), wks[a]8.1 (6.3, 12.3)7.0 (5.9, 8.1)
      TFST
      Pts who started FST or died, n (%)115 (41)175 (63)
      Started FST, n (%)82 (29)129 (47)
      Died, n (%)33 (12)46 (17)
      Median TFST or death (95% CI), mths[a]23.5 (22.0, NC)13.8 (12.3, 15.7)
      HR (95% CI)[b]0.51 (0.40, 0.64), p < 0.0001
      PFS2 (investigator assessed)
      Second progression or death, n (%)73 (26)106 (38)
      Median PFS2 (95% CI), mths[a]NC (23.7, NC)20.0 (18.2, NC)
      HR (95% CI)[b]0.58 (0.44, 0.78), p = 0.0004
      TSST
      Pts who started SST or died, n (%)74 (27)110 (40)
      Started SST, n (%)24 (9)39 (14)
      Died, n (%)50 (18)71 (26)
      Median TSST or death (95% CI), mths[a]NC (NC, NC)25.9 (20.0, NC)
      HR (95% CI)[b]0.60 (0.45, 0.80), p = 0.0005
      aCalculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.bHR and CI were obtained directly from the U and V statistics. The analysis was performed using a log rank test stratified by race (Asian versus non-Asian) and mutation type (Ex19del vs L858R). 2-sided p-value. CI, confidence interval; FST, first subsequent therapy (second-line treatment); HR, hazard ratio; NC, not calculable; PFS2, second progression-free survival (or death) post initiation of second-line treatment (i.e. time from randomisation to second progression on subsequent treatment); TFST, time to first subsequent therapy or death; TSST, time to second subsequent therapy or death; SST, second subsequent therapy; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1.

      Conclusions:
      PFS benefit with osimertinib was preserved throughout time-to-event post-progression endpoints. Step-wise increase of the statistically significant HRs (PFS 0.46, TFST 0.51, PFS2 0.58, TSST 0.60) provides confidence in the interim OS data.

      Clinical trial identification:
      ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02296125

      Legal entity responsible for the study:
      AstraZeneca

      Funding:
      AstraZeneca

      Disclosure:
      D. Planchard: Advisory boards: Astrazeneca, Boehringer, BMS, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, Roche M. Boyer: Research funding and/or honoraria for advisory board work or talks, paid to my institution, from: AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, Pfizer, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb. P. Cheema: Advisory board/Honorarium: AstraZeneca Research grant: AstraZeneca T. Takahashi: Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly Japan, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Ono Pharmaceutical, Grants: AstraZeneca KK, Pfizer Japan Inc., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., MSD K.K. A. Todd: Employee of AstraZeneca but own no stocks or shares, and am not a member of any board. I am not aware of any other conflicts of interest or opportunities for financial gain. A. McKeown: Employee of, and shareholder in, AstraZeneca. Y. Rukazenkov: Employee of and shareholder in AstraZeneca. Y. Ohe: Grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Ono, grants and personal fees from BMS, grants and personal fees from Chougai, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants from Kyorin, grants from Dainippon- Sumitomo, personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, personal fees from Nipponkayaku, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Bayer, grants and personal fees from Lilly, outside the submitted work. All personal fees were honoraria for consulting or lectures. 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.

  • +

    New approaches in rare thoracic tumors (ID 60)

    • Event: ELCC 2018
    • Type: Proffered Paper session
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      112O - Primary result of an investigator-initiated phase II trial of nivolumab for unresectable or recurrent thymic carcinoma: PRIMER study (NCCH1505) (ID 349)

      11:00 - 12:30  |  Author(s): Y. Ohe

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      Thymic carcinoma (TC) is a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. Treatment options are limited, especially after relapse. We previously reported that PD-L1 positivity was observed in 70% of TCs by immunohistochemistry suggesting anti PD-1/PD-L1 agents could be a promising treatment.

      Methods:
      In this open-label, two-stage, multi-center, single-arm, phase II trial, the main eligibility criteria were: unresectable or recurrent TC, an ECOG-PS of 0 or 1, the presence of measurable disease, progression after at least one previous platinum-based chemo(radio)therapy treatment, and no history of autoimmune disease. Nivolumab was administered at a dose of 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the response rate (RR) as evaluated by central review using the RECIST v1.1; secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, disease control rate, and safety. The planned sample size was 15 for the first stage and 15 for the second stage, with a threshold RR of 5%, an expected RR of 20%, one-sided alpha of 5% and power of 80%. This trial was registered with UMIN000022007.

      Results:
      Between July 1 and August 16, 2016, 15 patients were accrued in the first stage; at the data cutoff (August 31, 2017), all were assessable for a response. Median follow-up time was 3.8 months (range 1.4–12.0). All were Japanese, 12 were male, median age was 55 (range 34–70), 13 had squamous histology. The median number of nivolumab cycles received was 8 (range 3–29). RR by central review was 0% (no patient with complete or partial response; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0–21.8). Eleven patients had stable disease and four had progressive disease. Median PFS was 3.8 months (95% CI: 1.9–5.6), and 12-month PFS rate was 13.3% (95% CI: 2.2–34.6). Two patients experienced a treatment-related serious adverse events (grade 3 AST increase and grade 2 adrenal insufficiency). Because the early termination criteria at the first stage (less than one responder) was fulfilled, the patient accrual was terminated.

      Conclusions:
      Despite of the small number of patients, our results suggested further development of nivolumab is not recommended in previously treated unresectable or recurrent TC.

      Clinical trial identification:


      Legal entity responsible for the study:
      None

      Funding:
      Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development

      Disclosure:
      T. Seto: Consulting and advisory services, speaking or writing engagements, public presentations; AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, MSD, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho, Takeda. Direct research support to the responsible project lead (e.g., Principal Investigator); Eisai, MSD, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Astellas, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer. H. Horinouchi: Research Grant; Ono pharmaceutical, BMS, MSD, Taiho, Chugai, Novartis, Astellas, Merck Serono. Honoraria; Ono pharmaceutical, BMS, Taiho, Chugai, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca. S. Umemura: Corporate-sponsored research; MSD, AstraZeneca. Honoraria; AstraZeneca, Chugai pharmaceutical, Ono, Boehringer ingelheim. Y. Hosomi: Honoraria; Lilly, Ono pharmaceutical, BMS, Chugai, AstraZeneca. Corporate-sponsored research; Lilly, Ono pharmaceutical, Chugai, AstraZeneca, Taiho, MSD. M. Satouchi: Corporate-sponsored research; Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Japan. Lecture fees and/or honoraria; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan, Merck, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Japan, Taiho Pharmaceutical. Y. Ohe: Corporate-sponsored research; Taiho, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Kyorin, Dainippon-Sumitomo, Ignyta. Membership on an advisory board or board of directors or other substantive relationships; Taiho, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Daiichi-Sankyo, Nipponkayaku, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer. 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.