Subscribe

Advertisement

SCLC

(Small Cell Lung Cancer)

Relevant Articles About Non Small Cell Lung Cancer Research and Clinical Trials

RELATED :NSCLC (Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer)

Stories to Watch

VIEW ALL

VIEW ALL

Advertisement

Advertisement

LATEST

View More

Advertisement

Popular With Peers

More Oncology Studies

Latest Conferences

VIEW MORE

Latest Conferences

VIEW ALL

VIEW ALL

RELATED CONTENT

VIEW ALL

Firmonertinib in TKI-Naive EGFR PACC+ NSCLC

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The FURTHER phase 1b trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of firmonertinib in TKI-naive patients with advanced EGFR PACC-mutant NSCLC.
  • The primary endpoint was confirmed ORR.
  • Firmonertinib demonstrated promising efficacy and acceptable safety in this patient population. Further investigation is warranted.

P-loop and αC-helix compressing (PACC) mutations constitute approximately 12% of EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These mutations, similar to ex20ins mutations, narrow the drug-binding pocket of ATP competitive EGFR inhibitors, posing a challenge for treatment. Firmonertinib, an oral, highly brain-penetrant EGFR inhibitor, has shown activity and selectivity across EGFR mutations, including PACC and ex20ins mutations.

Xiuning Le and the team aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of firmonertinib in patients with EGFR PACC-mutated NSCLC.

The global Phase 1b FURTHER study (FURMO-002; NCT05364073) involved 2 stages: a dose-escalation/backfill Stage 1 and a dose-expansion Stage 2. In Stage 2, Cohort 4 (PACC cohort), TKI-naive patients with EGFR PACC-mutant NSCLC were randomized to receive firmonertinib at either 160 mg or 240 mg once daily.

Key eligibility criteria included documented EGFR PACC mutation, measurable disease as defined by RECIST 1.1, and no prior EGFR TKI therapy. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR) and CNS ORR.

As of July 5, 2024, 60 patients were enrolled in the PACC cohort with a median age of 67 years. Of these, 66.7% were female, 71.7% were Asian, 33.3% had brain metastases, 28.3%/71.7% had ECOG scores of 0/1, and 78.3% had no prior metastatic systemic therapy. The BICR cutoff date was June 20, 2024. In first-line metastatic NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations, the ORR by BICR was 81.8% (n=22; 95% CI, 59.7%-94.8%) at 240 mg QD and 47.8% (n=23; 95% CI, 26.8%-69.4%) at 160 mg QD. Confirmed ORR by BICR was 63.6% (n=22; 95% CI, 40.7%-82.8%; 1 uPR pending confirmation) at 240 mg QD and 34.8% (n=23; 95% CI, 16.4%-57.3%; 1 uPR pending confirmation) at 160 mg QD.

Responses were seen across a wide range of PACC mutations. Median DoR was not reached, as 90.9% (n=20 of 22) of patients with confirmed responses remain on treatment (median follow-up 4.2 months).

Among first-line metastatic patients with brain metastases, CNS confirmed ORR by BICR was 46.2% (n=6 of 13) per modified RECIST. The safety profile in the PACC cohort was consistent with previous firmonertinib studies, with the most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) being diarrhea, rash, stomatitis, and hepatic enzyme elevation.

Most TRAEs were Grade 1-2, with Grade 3 events occurring in 20.7% and 12.9% of patients at the 240 mg and 160 mg dose levels, respectively. No Grade ≥4 TRAEs or treatment discontinuations due to TRAEs were reported.

FURTHER is the first clinical trial to assess firmonertinib in patients with NSCLC who had EGFR PACC mutations. The study showed promising efficacy in the first-line metastatic setting, especially at the 240 mg dose, with notable CNS antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile. These findings support the need for further investigation of firmonertinib in this patient population.

The trial was sponsored by ArriVent BioPharma, Inc.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/3203

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05364073

Le X, Yu Y, Zhao Y, et al. (2024). “FURTHER: a global, randomized study of firmonertinib at two dose levels in TKI-naive, advanced NSCLC with EGFR PACC mutations.” Presented at: World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 8, 2024; Singapore.

Aumolertinib as Maintenance Therapy in NSCLC

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The POLESTAR phase III trial aimed to assess tthe efficacy and safety of aumolertinib maintenance therapy after chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable stage III EGFRm NSCLC.
  • The primary endpoint was PFS.
  • Researchers found aumolertinib significantly improved PFS over placebo, potentially becoming a new standard for stage III EGFRm NSCLC.

The standard of care (SOC) for patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who do not progress after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) includes consolidation therapy with durvalumab. However, the benefit of this immunotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutant (EGFRm) NSCLC is uncertain. Aumolertinib, a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has shown efficacy in first- and second-line treatment of EGFRm NSCLC and is approved for use in China.

J. Yu and the team aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of aumolertinib maintenance therapy following CRT in patients with stage III, unresectable EGFRm NSCLC. This interim analysis presented the efficacy and safety data from the trial.

Patients with EGFRm (Ex19del or L858R) unresectable stage III NSCLC who had not progressed following cCRT or sequential CRT (sCRT) were randomized 2:1 to receive aumolertinib (110 mg daily orally) or placebo until disease progression as per RECIST v1.1. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), other efficacy endpoints, and safety.

As of February 5, 2024, 147 patients were enrolled in China, with 94 assigned to aumolertinib and 53 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Aumolertinib significantly improved PFS compared to placebo (HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.11, 0.35; P<0.0001). Median PFS was 30.4 months for aumolertinib versus 3.8 months for placebo. PFS benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups.

The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) was increased blood creatine phosphokinase, occurring in 6.4% of aumolertinib recipients versus 0% of placebo recipients. All other grade ≥ 3 TRAEs were reported in less than 2% of patients in both groups.

Aumolertinib demonstrated significant improvement in PFS compared to placebo without new safety signals. These findings suggested that aumolertinib is a promising treatment option as maintenance therapy for patients with unresectable stage III EGFRm NSCLC after CRT.

The trial was sponsored by Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/3201

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04951635

Yu J, Meng X, Ge H, et al. (2024). “Aumolertinib maintenance after chemoradiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: interim results of the phase III study (POLESTAR).” Presented at: World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 8, 2024; Singapore

Efficacy of Platinum Pemetrexed in EGFR+ NSCLC Post-Osimertinib

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The OCELOT phase 2 trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of 2L platinum pemetrexed chemotherapy in patients with EGFR+ aNSCLC.
  • The primary endpoint was to determine ORR and the secondary outcome was PFS and TTF.
  • Researchers noticed that platinum pemetrexed offers comparable efficacy in patients with EGFR+ aNSCLC.

Platinum doublet chemotherapy remains a standard treatment for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFR+) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) who experience disease progression on osimertinib. However, there is a lack of evidence from pragmatic clinical trials evaluating second-line (2L) platinum chemotherapy following osimertinib.

Saurav Verma and the team aimed to assess the efficacy of 2L platinum pemetrexed chemotherapy in patients with EGFR+ aNSCLC who progressed after osimertinib.

They performed an inclusive analysis of the OCELOT (NCT04335292) clinical trial, a multicentered phase II open-label study. This trial evaluated osimertinib as a third-line (3L) treatment for EGFR+ aNSCLC in 2 cohorts: Cohort A, which included patients receiving osimertinib as first-line (1L) treatment followed by platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy as 2L treatment, and Cohort B, which involved patients with uncommon EGFR mutations receiving osimertinib as 1L treatment.

Patients in Cohort A were enrolled during their 2L chemotherapy phase, while those in Cohort B were enrolled prior to initiating 1L osimertinib. The study analyzed response rates according to RECIST 1.1 criteria, along with survival outcomes for patients treated with platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy after progression on osimertinib. Chemotherapy dosing was determined at the investigator’s discretion. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR), while secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) and time to treatment failure (TTF).

About 29 patients received 2L treatment with platinum pemetrexed at the data cut-off for this analysis. Of these, 52% (n = 15) were male, with a median age of 63 years (range, 36-87 years). Among the patients, 22 had evaluable disease. The ORR for the entire cohort was 31.8%, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 81.8%, with 7 patients achieving a partial response, 11 experiencing stable disease, and 4 showing progressive disease.

For the 6 patients with uncommon EGFR mutations, the ORR was 50% (n = 3), and the DCR was 83% (n = 5). The median PFS for the whole cohort was 6.6 months, with a 6-month PFS rate of 50% (this result remained consistent when restricted to common mutations). The median TTF was 7.0 months, and the 6-month TTF was 53.3%. Overall survival (OS) data remain immature.

The study concluded that the response rate and PFS for patients with EGFR+ aNSCLC treated with 2L platinum pemetrexed after progression on osimertinib are comparable to those reported in the published literature. This finding supports that the benefits of platinum pemetrexed are applicable to a pragmatic patient population receiving chemotherapy dosed at the investigators’ discretion.

The trial was sponsored by Mark Vincent.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/1284

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04335292

Verma S, Vincent M.D, Liu G, et al. (2024). “Efficacy of Platinum Pemetrexed in Patients with EGFR Mutated Advanced Lung Cancer after Progression on Osimertinib – A Prospective Cohort Study.” Presented at: World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 8, 2024; Singapore.

SG vs Docetaxel: OS Benefit in mNSCLC After Anti-PD-(L)1

SG vs Docetaxel: OS Benefit in mNSCLC After Anti-PD-(L)1

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The EVOKE-01 phase 3 trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of SG vs. docetaxel in patients with mNSCLC post-therapy.
  • The primary endpoint was OS.
  • Researchers found SG improved OS vs. docetaxel in patients with mNSCLC who were non-responsive to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy.

Patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) who experience disease progression following both platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-(L)1 therapy have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis.

While the EVOKE-01 trial did not meet its primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) improvement in the overall population, prior response to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy has been shown to impact OS. Therefore, this analysis focuses on a key subgroup of EVOKE-01 participants, specifically those with disease non-responsive to their last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen.

Marina Chiara Garassino and the team aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SG vs. docetaxel in patients with mNSCLC who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-(L)1 treatment and were classified as non-responsive to their last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen.

In the EVOKE-01 trial, patients were randomized to receive either SG (10 mg/kg intravenously on Days 1 and 8) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously on Day 1) in 21-day cycles.

The primary endpoint was OS, and key secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). This subgroup analysis focused on outcomes within the subset of patients classified as non-responsive to their last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen, further stratified by best response to the last anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (stable disease [SD] or progressive disease [PD]) and histology (squamous and non-squamous).

The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 63.5% (n=383) of patients classified as non-responsive to their last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen (n=192 SG; n=191 docetaxel). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment arms within this subgroup.

In the non-responsive subgroup, the median OS was 11.8 months with SG and 8.3 months with docetaxel (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.97). This OS benefit with SG was observed regardless of whether patients had SD (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.55-1.13) or PD (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.46-0.98) as the best response to the last anti-PD-(L)1-containing regimen.

Similarly, the OS benefit remained consistent across both squamous (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.38-1.02) and non-squamous (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.59-1.07) histologies.

The study concluded that SG showed a clinically meaningful OS improvement compared to docetaxel in patients with mNSCLC non-responsive to their last anti-PD-(L)1 regimen. This benefit was consistent across SD and PD responses to prior therapy and regardless of histology, suggesting SG may be a valuable treatment option for this patient population.

The trial was sponsored by Gilead Sciences.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/727

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05089734

Garassino MC, Juan-Vidal O, Felip E, et al. (2024). “Sacituzumab Govitecan vs Docetaxel in Patients with mNSCLC Non-Responsive to Last Anti-PD-(L)1 Regimen: EVOKE-01.” Presented at: World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC); September 9, 2024; Singapore.

Impact of Atezolizumab on NSCLC Stage II-IIIA Relapse Rates

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The IMpower010 phase 3 trial aimed to investigate long-term DFS and OS outcomes of adjuvant atezolizumab vs BSC in patients with NSCLC.
  • The primary endpoint was to determine DFS.
  • Researchers noted that atezolizumab improved DFS and OS vs. BSC in patients with stage II-IIIA NSCLC.

IMpower010 (NCT02486718) demonstrated significant disease-free survival (DFS) improvement with adjuvant atezolizumab compared to best supportive care (BSC) in patients with stage II-IIIA Non -Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) with PD-L1 tumor cell (TC)≥1% and in the all-randomized stage II-IIIA populations, but not in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population.

The benefit was particularly notable in the TC≥50% subgroup. Recent analyses, including the final DFS and second interim overall survival (OS) assessments with ≥5 years of follow-up, showed that while the DFS significance boundary for the ITT population was not crossed and OS was similar between arms, atezolizumab continued to show positive trends in DFS and OS compared to BSC in the PD-L1 TC≥1% and TC≥50% groups.

Enriqueta Felip and the team aimed to assess the long-term effects of adjuvant atezolizumab versus BSC on DFS and OS in stage II-IIIA NSCLC, focusing on detailed relapse patterns and post-relapse therapies.

They performed an inclusive analysis of the IMpower010 study, which involved 1005 patients who received 1-4 cycles of 21-day chemotherapy post-surgery and were subsequently randomized 1:1 to receive either 16 cycles of atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks or BSC. The clinical cutoff date for this analysis was January 26, 2024.

In the stage II-IIIA TC≥1% and TC≥50% populations, the DFS unstratified hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were 0.77 (0.52-1.13) and 0.57 (0.32-1.02) for stage II disease; 0.66 (0.47-0.93) and 0.42 (0.24-0.75) for stage IIIA disease; 0.82 (0.45-1.52) and 0.89 (0.37-2.16) for regional lymph node (pN) status N0; 0.65 (0.42-0.99) and 0.40 (0.20-0.81) for pN1; and 0.74 (0.51-1.07) and 0.42 (0.22-0.77) for pN2. Similar patterns were observed for OS and for both DFS and OS when excluding patients with EGFR or ALK alterations from the TC≥50% population.

The study concluded that after ≥5 years of follow-up, patients in the atezolizumab arm experienced greater improvements in DFS and OS compared to those in the BSC arm, regardless of disease stage or pN status, with a notable advantage in N1/N2 stages.

The overall recurrence rates were lower in the atezolizumab arm across both PD-L1 TC≥1% and TC≥50% populations. Despite the small patient numbers, distant and central nervous system relapse rates were higher in the BSC arm than in the atezolizumab arm in the TC≥50% population. Additionally, post-relapse cancer immunotherapy use was more frequent in the BSC arm.

The trial is sponsored by the Hoffmann-La Roche.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/3210

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02486718

Felip E, Wakelee H.A, Vallieres E, et al. (2024). “IMpower010 5-y Subgroup Analysis and Relapse Patterns: Phase 3 Study of Atezolizumab vs BSC in Stage II-IIIA NSCLC.” Presented at IASLC-WCLC 2024, September 8, 2024; Singapore.

Efficacy & Safety of Larotrectinib for TRK Fusion Lung Cancer

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The Phase 1 & 2 trials aimed to investigate the updated efficacy, safety, and biomarker profile of larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion lung cancer.
  • Researchers noted larotrectinib’s effectiveness supports using NGS panels for TRK fusion lung cancer.

NTRK gene fusions are oncogenic drivers in a range of cancers, including lung cancer. Larotrectinib, a first-in-class, highly selective, CNS-active TRK inhibitor, has been approved for the tumor-agnostic treatment of TRK fusion cancers due to its robust and durable efficacy across various tumor types.

Jessica Lin and the team aimed to assess the updated efficacy, safety, and biomarker profile of larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion lung cancer.

They performed an inclusive analysis of patients with TRK fusion lung cancer who were treated with larotrectinib in 2 clinical trials (NCT02122913 and NCT02576431). Larotrectinib was given at 100 mg twice daily. Independent review committee (IRC) evaluated the responses using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The data cutoff for this analysis was July 20, 2023.

A total of 32 patients with TRK fusion lung cancer, with a median age of 55.5 years (range 25-81), were enrolled by the data cutoff, including 12 with CNS metastases at baseline. All patients had their NTRK gene fusions identified locally using next-generation sequencing (NGS), with fusions involving NTRK1 (n=24; 75%) and NTRK3 (n=8; 25%). The patients had a median of 2 prior lines of systemic therapies, with 1 patient being treatment-naïve.

The overall response rate per IRC was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47-81), comprising 4 complete responses (CR), 17 partial responses, 7 stable disease, 2 progressive disease, and 2 not evaluable. The median time to first response was 1.8 months (range 1.5-7.3). The median duration of response was 34 months (95% CI 10-not estimable [NE]), with a median follow-up of 26 months. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 22 months (95% CI 10-NE), with a median follow-up of 28 months.

The median overall survival was 39 months (95% CI 17-NE), with a median follow-up of 33 months. Treatment duration varied from 2 to over 75 months. By the data cutoff, 11 patients had experienced progression and 6 of these continued treatment for ≥4 weeks post-progression due to ongoing clinical benefit. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were mostly Grade 1/2, with Grade 3/4 TRAEs reported in 9 patients.

Of these 1 patient discontinued treatment due to TRAEs (elevated alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and gamma-glutamyltransferase). Baseline genomic data, derived from circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA; n=15 patients) or tissue DNA (n=13 patients), were available for 16 patients. Baseline ctDNA analysis detected NTRK gene fusions in 6 of 15 patients.

Additional baseline NTRK and known or likely oncogenic co-occurring mutations were found in 6 of the 16 patients. Post-baseline, potential oncogenic mutations were identified in 7 of 13 patients with available DNA samples. About 5 patients had acquired potential resistance mutations, 2 had on-target mutations, 2 had off-target mutations, and 1 had both.

The study concluded that larotrectinib continues to show rapid and durable responses, prolonged survival benefits, and a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced TRK fusion lung cancer. These findings reinforce the value of using NGS panels, including ctDNA, to detect NTRK gene fusions in patients with lung cancer to identify those who might benefit from targeted therapy.

The trial is sponsored by Bayer.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/2579

Clinical Trials: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02122913
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02576431

Lin J.J, Tan D.S.W, Kummar S, et al. (2024). “Updated Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarker Analysis in Patients with TRK Fusion Lung Cancer Treated with Larotrectinib.” Presented at IASLC-WCLC 2024, September 8, 2024; Singapore.

Comparing OS of Dato-DXd vs Docetaxel in NSCLC: TROPION-Lung01

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The TROPION-LUNG01 phase 3 trial aimed to investigate the OS benefit and safety of Dato-DXd vs docetaxel in patients with NSCLC.
  • The primary endpoints were to determine PFS & OS and the secondary endpoints were safety, PFS, and OS.
  • Researchers observed a numerical OS improvement with Dato-DXd vs docetaxel, especially in nonsquamous NSCLC.

Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) face limited treatment options after progressing on first-line (1L) therapies. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd), a novel antibody-drug conjugate targeting trophoblast cell surface antigen 2, is being evaluated across multiple solid tumors.

In the pivotal phase 3 TROPION-Lung01 trial (NCT04656652), which focused on patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC, Dato-DXd met 1 of its dual primary endpoints, demonstrating significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.91; P = 0.004). Superior efficacy was observed in patients with nonsquamous histology.

Jacob Sands and the team aimed to assess the overall survival benefit and safety profile of Dato-DXd compared to docetaxel in this patient population.

They performed an inclusive analysis in the global, phase 3, open-label TROPION-Lung01 study, where patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either Dato-DXd at 6 mg/kg or docetaxel at 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks (Q3W).

The primary endpoints included PFS assessed by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS). Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted for PFS and OS based on histology, particularly focusing on nonsquamous NSCLC. Safety assessments, including treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), were secondary endpoints of the study.

About 299 and 305 patients were randomized to receive Dato-DXd or docetaxel, respectively. The baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment arms. At the data cutoff of March 1, 2024, the median follow-up was 23.1 months for both groups.

The median overall survival (OS) was 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.0-13.9) for Dato-DXd compared to 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.1-12.8) for docetaxel (HR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14; P=0.530) in the full analysis set. In the prespecified nonsquamous subgroup, median OS was numerically longer with Dato-DXd at 14.6 months (95% CI, 12.4-16.0) vs 12.3 months (95% CI, 10.7-14.0) with docetaxel (HR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-1.05).

The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) with Dato-DXd were stomatitis (47% vs 16% with docetaxel) and nausea (34% vs 17% with docetaxel), while the most frequent TRAEs with docetaxel were alopecia (35% vs 32% with Dato-DXd) and neutropenia (26% vs 5% with Dato-DXd). Grade ≥3 TRAEs and those leading to treatment discontinuation occurred more frequently with docetaxel than with Dato-DXd (42% vs 26% and 12% vs 8%, respectively).

The study concluded that while TROPION-Lung01 did not meet the second dual primary endpoint of OS, Dato-DXd demonstrated a numerical improvement in OS compared to docetaxel in the full NSCLC analysis set.

In the prespecified nonsquamous NSCLC subgroup, Dato-DXd showed a clinically meaningful trend towards prolonged OS. The overall safety and efficacy profile of Dato-DXd supports its potential as a new therapeutic option for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC who are eligible for subsequent therapy.

The trial is sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo.

Source: https://cattendee.abstractsonline.com/meeting/20598/presentation/3217

Clinical Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04656652

Sands J, Lisberg A, Okamoto I, et al. (2024). “Datopotamab Deruxtecan Vs Docetaxel in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Final Overall Survival from TROPION-Lung01.” Presented at IASLC-WCLC 2024, September 8, 2024; Singapore.

VIEW ALL

SELECT ONCOLOGY JOURNAL ARTICLES

Lower frequencies of circulating suppressive regulatory T cells and higher frequencies of CD4+ naïve T cells at baseline are associated with severe immune-related adverse events in immune checkpoint inhibitor-treated melanoma

Lower frequencies of circulating suppressive regulatory T cells and higher frequencies of CD4+ naïve T cells at baseline are associated with severe immune-related adverse events in immune checkpoint inhibitor-treated melanoma

Background Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are major barriers of clinical management and further development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for cancer therapy. Therefore, biomarkers associated with the onset of severe irAEs are needed. In this study, …

BMJ Journals

1222 Antigen-specific delivery of TCR and costimulatory signals by a protein scaffold selectively activates and markedly expands naïve MART-1-specific CD8+ T cells

1222 Antigen-specific delivery of TCR and costimulatory signals by a protein scaffold selectively activates and markedly expands naïve MART-1-specific CD8+ T cells

Background Adoptive cell transfer (ACT) shows promise as an immunotherapy for melanoma and other cancers. However, there are several challenges associated with ACT such as the logistical complexity and inconsistency when using patient-derived antigen-presenting cells for …

BMJ Journals

890 Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in anti-PD(L)-1 naïve and experienced HCC patients -- single institute experience in Taiwan

890 Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in anti-PD(L)-1 naïve and experienced HCC patients -- single institute experience in Taiwan

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the efficacy of combining nivolumab and ipilimumab in Anti-PD(L)-1 Naïve and Experienced HCC patients remains unclear. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 23 patients with advanced …

BMJ Journals

778 TILVANCE-301, a phase 3 study of lifileucel tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) cell therapy combined with pembrolizumab (pembro) vs pembro alone in treatment-naïve unresectable or metastatic melanoma

778 TILVANCE-301, a phase 3 study of lifileucel tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) cell therapy combined with pembrolizumab (pembro) vs pembro alone in treatment-naïve unresectable or metastatic melanoma

Background Novel early-line therapies for advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma are needed to improve the rate of deep and durable responses and increase the proportion of patients with long-term benefit. TILVANCE-301 will evaluate the efficacy and …

BMJ Journals