Virtual Library
Start Your Search
Giovanni L. Ceresoli
Author of
-
+
P1.06 - Mesothelioma (ID 169)
- Event: WCLC 2019
- Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
- Track: Mesothelioma
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 9/08/2019, 09:45 - 18:00, Exhibit Hall
-
+
P1.06-21 - Safety Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials Delivering Tumor Treating Fields to the Upper Torso (ID 2835)
09:45 - 18:00 | Author(s): Giovanni L. Ceresoli
- Abstract
Background
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields), a non-invasive, loco-regional, antimitotic treatment approved for glioblastoma (GBM), are delivered via transducer arrays to tumor region. Localized dermatitis underneath the arrays were main adverse events (AEs) reported in phase 3 GBM trials. The safety of TTFields was analyzed in phase I and II studies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [EF-15, NCT00749346] and malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) [STELLAR, NCT02397928].
Method
TTFields studies in this pooled analysis were EF-15 (n=41, advanced NSCLC; plus pemetrexed) and STELLAR (n=80, MPM; plus platinum and pemetrexed). TTFields were applied 12 - 18 hours/day at a frequency of 150 kHz. All patients received standard of care systemic chemotherapy for their disease in addition to TTFields. Severity and frequency of AEs, and association with TTFields treatment were evaluated (CTCAE criteria version 4.0).
Result
Patients were aged 27-78 years: STELLAR: 67 (27-78) and EF-15: 63 (44-78), ECOG 0-1; 7 patients in EF-15 had ECOG 2. The incidence of grade 1-2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities was 35%. The most common low grade GI toxicities were: nausea (17%), vomiting (6%), constipation (10%) and diarrhea (6%). Grade 1-2 general disorders (16% fatigue and 11% asthenia) were common. Dyspnea Grade 1-2 (12%) and Grade 3-4 (5%) were considered related to standard chemotherapy or underlying disease. Grade 1-2 cardiovascular AEs were 7%; one case of severe arrhythmia (atrial flutter) was unrelated to TTFields. The only common TTFields-related adverse event was dermatitis below the transducer arrays. 59% patients had dermatological AEs: 53% Grade 1-2 dermatitis, 4% grade 3 dermatitis and 11% Grade 1-2 pruritus.
Conclusion
Treatment of solid tumors with TTFields 150 kHz to the thorax did not result in serious AEs or treatment-related pulmonary, cardiac, hematological or gastrointestinal toxicities. Expected dermatological toxicity beneath the device transducer arrays was seen in 59% patients, and resolved after a short treatment break or termination of treatment. These safety results and encouraging survival outcomes support the potential use of TTFields therapy in NSCLC and mesothelioma.
-
+
P2.06 - Mesothelioma (ID 170)
- Event: WCLC 2019
- Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
- Track: Mesothelioma
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 9/09/2019, 10:15 - 18:15, Exhibit Hall
-
+
P2.06-01 - STELLAR Trial: Radiological Response Patterns of TTFields Plus Chemotherapy in First-Line Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (ID 2533)
10:15 - 18:15 | Author(s): Giovanni L. Ceresoli
- Abstract
Background
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are an anti-mitotic, regional treatment modality, utilizing low intensity alternating electric fields delivered non-invasively to the tumor using a portable, medical device. TTFields have significantly extended survival of glioblastoma patients. In-vitro, human malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) cells were highly susceptible to TTFields. In the STELLAR trial [NCT02397928], patients with unresectable MPM treated with first-line chemotherapy in combination with TTFields had a significantly higher median overall survival compared to historical controls (18.2 Vs. 12.1 months). We analyzed radiological data from STELLAR patients whose tumors responded while receiving the combined therapy.
Method
The trial accrued 80 patients with unresectable, previously untreated mesothelioma who were treated with continuous 150 kHz TTFields (>18h/day) in combination with pemetrexed and cisplatin or carboplatin (at standard dosing). Inclusion criteria: ECOG PS of 0-1, pathologically proven mesothelioma and at least one measurable lesion according to modified RECIST criteria. Patients were followed q3w (CT scan q6w) until disease progression. Radiological assessments were done at each study site. EOCG status and cancer-related pain were assessed until disease progression using a visual analog scale.
Result
Partial responses (PRs) were seen in 40.3% of evaluable patients and clinical benefit (PR+SD) was seen in 97.2% of patients. The median time between treatment start and PR was 1.8 (1.4-4.4) months). All patients presenting with PR during the STELLAR study had continuous reduction in the total sum of lesion diameters, suggesting no initial/pseudo-progression. 83% of the patients who responded to the combined therapy finally had disease progression within median response duration of 5.7 (1.4-13) months, per Kaplan-Meier Estimator. One patient did not progress for more than 27 months. Median time to deterioration in performance status was 13.1 months. Average pain score was lower compared to baseline during the first 7 months of treatment and higher later with a median time to a clinical significant 33% increase in pain of 8.4 months. Compliance with TTFields was 68% (16.3 hours/day) during the first 3 months of therapy. No TTFields-related other than expected dermatitis below the arrays were reported.
Conclusion
The STELLAR study showed significant survival extension in previously untreated MPM patients. Response rates were similar to that of current SOC treatment, but lasted longer with the addition of TTFields. TTFields was not associated with a decrease in performance status or an increase in pain. TTFields in combination with chemotherapy are efficacious in MPM vs chemotherapy alone reported in historical data.
