Adjuvant Abemaciclib Plus Endocrine Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative, High-Risk Early Breast Cancer: Results From a Preplanned monarchE Overall Survival Interim Analysis, Including 5-Year Efficacy Outcomes

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) resulted in a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) that persisted beyond the 2-year treatment period in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC). Here, we report 5-year efficacy results from a prespecified overall survival (OS) interim analysis. In the intent-to-treat population, with a median follow-up of 54 months, the benefit of abemaciclib was sustained with hazard ratios of 0.680 (95% CI, 0.599 to 0.772) for IDFS and 0.675 (95% CI, 0.588 to 0.774) for DRFS. This persistence of abemaciclib benefit translated to continuous separation of the curves with a deepening in 5-year absolute improvement in IDFS and DRFS rates of 7.6% and 6.7%, respectively, compared with rates of 6% and 5.3% at 4 years and 4.8% and 4.1% at 3 years. With fewer deaths in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared with the ET-alone arm (208 v 234), statistical significance was not reached for OS. No new safety signals were observed. In conclusion, abemaciclib plus ET continued to reduce the risk of developing invasive and distant disease recurrence beyond the completion of treatment. The increasing absolute improvement at 5 years is consistent with a carryover effect and further supports the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk EBC.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes from monarchE: Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy as adjuvant therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In monarchE, abemaciclib demonstrated a sustained benefit in invasive disease-free survival and a tolerable safety profile at 42-months median follow-up. With no expected disease-related symptoms, therapies in the adjuvant setting should preserve quality of life (QoL). With all patients off abemaciclib, we report updated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for the full 2-year treatment period and follow-up.

METHODS

Patients completed PROs including FACT-B, FACT-ES, and FACIT-Fatigue at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months during treatment, and 1, 6, and 12 months after treatment discontinuation. Mixed effects repeated measures model estimated changes from baseline within and between arms for QoL scales and individual items. Meaningful changes were prespecified and no statistical testing was performed. Frequencies of responses to items associated with relevant adverse events and treatment bother were summarized.

RESULTS

At baseline, completion rates for PRO instruments were >96 %. Mean changes from baseline for all QoL scales were numerically similar within and between arms (ie, less than prespecified thresholds). The same was observed for all individual items, except diarrhea. Within abemaciclib arm, meaningful differences for diarrhea were observed at 3 and 6 months (mean increases of 1.19 and 1.03 points on 5-point scale, respectively). During treatment, most patients in both arms (69-78 %) reported being bothered "a little bit" or "not at all" by side effects. Overall, patterns for fatigue were similar between arms. During post-treatment follow-up, PROs in both arms were similar to baseline.

CONCLUSION

PRO findings confirm a tolerable and reversible toxicity profile for abemaciclib. QoL was preserved with the addition of adjuvant abemaciclib to endocrine therapy, supporting its use in patients with HR+, HER2-, high-risk early breast cancer.

Abstract GS1-09: Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: results from a pre-planned monarchE overall survival interim analysis, including 4-year efficacy outcomes

Background Adjuvant abemaciclib (a CDK4 and 6 inhibitor) combined with ET resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in patients (pts) with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high risk EBC in the monarchE trial, and is an approved adjuvant therapy for these patients. Here we present efficacy results from a pre-specified overall survival interim analysis (OS IA2) which was planned to occur 2 years (yrs) after the primary outcome analysis. Methods Pts were randomized (1:1) to receive ET for up to 10 yrs +/- abemaciclib for 2 yrs (study treatment period). High-risk EBC was defined as either ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALN), or 1-3 ALN with either Grade 3 disease and/or tumor ≥5 cm (Cohort 1). While the proliferation biomarker Ki-67 was centrally assessed in all pts with available tissue sample, an additional smaller group of pts with 1-3+ ALN and central Ki-67 ≥20% as the only high-risk feature were included (Cohort 2). The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of both Cohort 1 (5120 pts) and Cohort 2 (517 pts). Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard model. Results At a median follow-up of 42 months, all pts were off abemaciclib. IDFS and DRFS data illustrate a sustained benefit beyond the treatment period. In the ITT population, the HR for IDFS was 0.664 (95% CI: 0.578, 0.762) and DRFS was 0.659 (95% CI: 0.567, 0.767). At 4 yrs, this reflected an improvement in IDFS rates from 79.4% to 85.8% (absolute difference 6.4%), and in DRFS rates from 82.5% to 88.4% (absolute difference 5.9%). The continued separation of the curves was associated with an increase in absolute benefit in IDFS 4-year rates compared to 2-and 3-year IDFS rates (absolute difference 2.8% and 4.8% respectively). While OS remained immature, there was a lower number of deaths observed in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared to the ET alone arm (157 [5.6%] vs 173 [6.1%], HR 0.929 [95% CI: 0.748, 1.153], p = 0.503), suggesting that the robust benefit in IDFS and DRFS began to translate into a numerically favorable OS HR. As previously described, within Cohort 1, a Ki-67 index of ≥20% was associated with a worse prognosis, but similar abemaciclib treatment effects were observed regardless of Ki-67 index. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusion The clinically meaningful benefit of adjuvant abemaciclib added to ET in HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk EBC persists beyond completion of abemaciclib therapy, yielding an increase in absolute IDFS and DRFS benefit at 4 yrs. While OS remains immature at this time, the lower number of deaths in the abemaciclib arm compared to the ET arm suggest that a survival signal favoring abemaciclib is emerging.

Citation Format: Stephen Johnston, Masakazu Toi, Joyce O’Shaughnessy, Priya Rastogi, Mario Campone, Patrick Neven, Chiun Sheng Huang, Jens Huober, Georgina Garnica Jaliffe, Irfan Cicin, Sara Tolaney, Matthew P. Goetz, Hope Rugo, Elżbieta Senkus, Laura Testa, Lucia Del Mastro, Chikako Shimizu, Ran Wei, Ashwin Shahir, Maria Munoz, Belen San Antonio, Valerie Andre, Nadia Harbeck, Miguel Martín. Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: results from a pre-planned monarchE overall survival interim analysis, including 4-year efficacy outcomes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-09.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy previously showed a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2)-negative, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. Here, we report updated results from an interim analysis to assess overall survival as well as invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival with additional follow-up.

METHODS

In monarchE, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 603 sites including hospitals and academic and community centres in 38 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive web-based response system (block size of 4), stratified by previous chemotherapy, menopausal status, and region, to receive standard-of-care endocrine therapy of physician's choice for up to 10 years with or without abemaciclib 150 mg orally twice a day for 2 years (treatment period). All therapies were administered in an open-label manner without masking. High-risk disease was defined as either four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, or between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and either grade 3 disease or tumour size of 5 cm or larger (cohort 1). A smaller group of patients were enrolled with between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of at least 20% as an additional risk feature (cohort 2). This was a prespecified overall survival interim analysis planned to occur 2 years after the primary outcome analysis for invasive disease-free survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03155997, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between July 17, 2017, and Aug 12, 2019, 5637 patients were randomly assigned (5601 [99·4%] were women and 36 [0·6%] were men). 2808 were assigned to receive abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy and 2829 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 37-47), median invasive disease-free survival was not reached in either group and the invasive disease-free survival benefit previously reported was sustained: HR 0·664 (95% CI 0·578-0·762, nominal p<0·0001). At 4 years, the absolute difference in invasive disease-free survival between the groups was 6·4% (85·8% [95% CI 84·2-87·3] in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group vs 79·4% [77·5-81·1] in the endocrine therapy alone group). 157 (5·6%) of 2808 patients in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group died compared with 173 (6·1%) of 2829 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group (HR 0·929, 95% CI 0·748-1·153; p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 548 [19·6%] of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy vs 24 [0·9%] of 2800 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group), leukopenia (318 [11·4%] vs 11 [0·4%]), and diarrhoea (218 [7·8%] vs six [0·2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 433 (15·5%) of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus 256 (9·1%) of 2800 receiving endocrine therapy. There were two treatment-related deaths in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group (diarrhoea and pneumonitis) and none in the endocrine therapy alone group.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant abemaciclib reduces the risk of recurrence. The benefit is sustained beyond the completion of treatment with an absolute increase at 4 years, further supporting the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to establish whether overall survival can be improved with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in these patients.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Abemaciclib Combined With Endocrine Therapy for the Adjuvant Treatment of HR+, HER2-, Node-Positive, High-Risk, Early Breast Cancer (monarchE)

PURPOSE

Many patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer (EBC) will not experience recurrence or have distant recurrence with currently available standard therapies. However, up to 30% of patients with high-risk clinical and/or pathologic features may experience distant recurrence, many in the first few years. Superior treatment options are needed to prevent early recurrence and development of metastases for this group of patients. Abemaciclib is an oral, continuously dosed, CDK4/6 inhibitor approved for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). Efficacy and safety of abemaciclib in ABC supported evaluation in the adjuvant setting.

METHODS

This open-label, phase III study included patients with HR+, HER2-, high-risk EBC, who had surgery and, as indicated, radiotherapy and/or adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with four or more positive nodes, or one to three nodes and either tumor size ≥ 5 cm, histologic grade 3, or central Ki-67 ≥ 20%, were eligible and randomly assigned (1:1) to standard-of-care adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) with or without abemaciclib (150 mg twice daily for 2 years). The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), and secondary end points included distant relapse-free survival, overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

At a preplanned efficacy interim analysis, among 5,637 randomly assigned patients, 323 IDFS events were observed in the intent-to-treat population. Abemaciclib plus ET demonstrated superior IDFS versus ET alone (P = .01; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.93), with 2-year IDFS rates of 92.2% versus 88.7%, respectively. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profile of abemaciclib.

CONCLUSION

Abemaciclib when combined with ET is the first CDK4/6 inhibitor to demonstrate a significant improvement in IDFS in patients with HR+, HER2- node-positive EBC at high risk of early recurrence.

Abstract P1-19-10: Safety and efficacy of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+, HER2-) advanced breast cancer: An age-specific subgroup analysis of MONARCH 2 and 3 trials

Background: Breast cancer incidence and mortality rates are increased in patients’ older than 65 years. However, there are limited reports on age-specific efficacy, safety, and drug tolerability, particularly in elderly patients older than 75 years old. Abemaciclib demonstrated clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) improvement in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) in HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer patients in the Phase 3 studies, MONARCH 2 and 3. Here we report exploratory subgroup analyses of MONARCH 2 and 3 to provide age-specific outcomes.

Methods: In MONARCH 2 (NCT02107703), patients progressing while on prior ET received abemaciclib (or placebo) plus fulvestrant; in MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621), postmenopausal women with no prior systemic therapy for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer received abemaciclib (or placebo) plus letrozole or anastrozole. Exploratory outcome analyses of MONARCH 2 and 3 studies were performed for three age groups (women aged &lt;65, 65-74, and ≥75 years). Using pooled safety data, we performed age-specific subgroup analyses of the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) associated with either ET or ET plus abemaciclib. To assess the impact of age on efficacy, a subgroup analysis of PFS was performed using a Cox model for each trial independently.

Results: Pooled safety data were available for 1152 patients treated in MONARCH 2 and 3 trials, including 59.7% pts &lt;65 years, 28.7% pts between 65 and 74 years, and 11.5% pts ≥ 75 years. Of those, 768 women received abemaciclib plus ET and 384 women received placebo plus ET. The most frequent TEAE was diarrhea and the most common Grade ≥3 TEAE was neutropenia. While diarrhea (any grade) occurred with similar incidence in abemaciclib-treated patients across age groups, clinically relevant diarrhea (Grade 2/3) was higher in the elderly (&lt;65, 39.5%; 65-74, 45.2%; ≥75, 55.4%); however, in the ≥75 group, diarrhea (Grade 2/3) incidence was also higher for placebo plus ET (&lt;65, 6.8%; 65-74, 4.5%; ≥75, 16.0%). Similarly, nausea and decreased appetite were moderately higher (by 10-20%) in the 2 abemaciclib-treated elderly subgroups. Fatigue (any grade) was higher in the 2 abemaciclib-treated elderly subgroups (&lt;65, 34.8%; 65-74, 48.4%; ≥75, 51.8%), while no differences were found across the 3 placebo subgroups. In contrast, the rates of Grade 3/4 neutropenia did not differ as a function of age in either the abemaciclib plus ET arm (&lt;65, 25.8%; 65-74, 27.4%; ≥75, 18.1%) or placebo plus ET arm. For efficacy, a consistent PFS benefit was observed with abemaciclib plus ET versus placebo plus ET across all three age-specified subgroups in both studies (Table).

Conclusion: Abemaciclib in combination with ET demonstrates a tolerable safety profile and consistent efficacy benefit across all age subgroups examined, supporting the use of this combination in elderly patient populations. Despite the limited number of patients in the ≥75 group with potentially confounding comorbidities, the safety data suggest that patient education and appropriate management of toxicities, including dose adjustments and use of supportive medication for gastrointestinal toxicities, could maximize the benefit of abemaciclib.

Table: Age-specified PFS outcomes from MONARCH 2 and 3MONARCH 2MONARCH 3Age GroupAbemaciclib + ETPlacebo + ETHR (95% CI)P-value *Abemaciclib + ETPlacebo + ETHR (95% CI)P-value *Events/NEvents/NEvents/NEvents/N&lt;65140/29192/1330.52 (0.40, 0.68)0.69581/18065/910.48 (0.35, 0.67)0.63465-7461/11442/600.63 (0.43, 0.94)40/10631/540.64 (0.40, 1.02)≥7521/4123/300.62 (0.34, 1.11)17/4212/200.54 (0.26, 1.13)Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; ET, endocrine therapy; HR, hazard ratio; PFS, progression-free survival.*P-value corresponds to the interaction test between age and treatment.

Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Meena Okera, Hans Wildiers, Mario Campone, Eva-Maria Grischke, Luis Manso, Valerie Anne Marie Andre, Amy Lee Chong, Belen San Antonio, Masakazu Toi, George W Sledge Jr. Safety and efficacy of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+, HER2-) advanced breast cancer: An age-specific subgroup analysis of MONARCH 2 and 3 trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-19-10.

Safety outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line platinum-based regimens in the United States

Background

We analyzed the treatment patterns and safety outcomes of the most common first-line platinum-based regimens initiated on or after non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis in a real-world setting.

Methods

Based on a United States oncology electronic medical record (EMR) database, patients treated with first-line platinum-based regimens after advanced NSCLC diagnosis from September 2008 to November 2014 were analyzed. Baseline characteristics and selected adverse events during treatment [incidence proportions and incidence rates (IRs)] were described by regimen. Propensity score stratification was used to adjust for baseline characteristics differences. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards model, with paclitaxel (Pac)/carboplatin (Carbo) as reference. Subgroup analysis was conducted for elderly patients (≥70 years old).

Results

The most common five regimens for the eligible patients were as follows: Pac/Carbo (n=3,009), pemetrexed (Pem)/Carbo (n=1,625), Pem/Carbo/bevacizumab (Bev) (n=735), Pac/Carbo/Bev (n=531), Pem/cisplatin (Cis) (n=357), and docetaxel (Doc)/Carbo (n=355). Highest IRs were reported for anemia, neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting across these regimens in patients of all ages. After propensity score stratification, compared with Pac/Carbo, risk of anemia was significantly lower with Pac/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.67), Pem/Cis (HR =0.68), and Pem/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.82); risk of neutropenia was comparable among all regimens except Doc/Carbo (significantly lower risk; HR =0.72); and risk of nausea (HR =1.45) and vomiting (HR =1.50) was significantly higher with Pem/Cis. Safety outcomes in elderly patients were consistent with the overall population.

Conclusions

While EMR data have limitations, the real-world safety outcome with individual chemotherapy regimen could be considered for the better selection of platinum-based therapies in NSCLC.

The Impact of Staging by Positron-Emission Tomography on Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced NSCLC

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the potential impact of stage migration because of positron-emission tomography (PET) scan staging on survival in the locally advanced (stage IIIA/B) NSCLC setting.

METHODS

In PROCLAIM, 598 patients with stage IIIA/B nonsquamous NSCLC (intent-to-treat population) were randomized to either pemetrexed plus cisplatin and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for 3 cycles followed by 4 cycles of pemetrexed consolidation or etoposide plus cisplatin and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for 2 cycles followed by a consolidation platinum-based doublet regimen for up to 2 cycles. Baseline PET scan (PET Yes versus No) was one of the stratification factors. Subgroup analyses (PET Yes versus No) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were conducted on the intent-to-treat population regardless of treatment, as the study did not show superior efficacy for either arm.

RESULTS

Majority (491 of 598; 82.1%) of patients had a baseline PET scan staging performed. A longer median OS (PET Yes versus No: 27.2 versus 20.8; hazard ratio = 0.81, p = 0.130) and an improved median PFS (PET Yes versus No: 11.3 versus 9.2; hazard ratio = 0.73, p = 0.012) were observed for patients with PET scans compared to those with conventional staging in both treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Both a significantly improved PFS and a numerically longer OS in the PET Yes subgroup, compared to patients with conventional staging, are consistent with improved survival due to stage migration. The magnitude of differences in OS and PFS based on PET scan is a reminder of the potential for factors other than the therapeutic intervention to affect outcomes.

Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance (RTQA) of Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the PROCLAIM Phase 3 Trial

PURPOSE

Chemoradiation therapy trials of different tumors, including lung cancer, have shown a correlation between protocol deviations and adverse outcomes. Radiation therapy quality assurance (RTQA) was mandated for all patients treated in the PROCLAIM trial evaluating 2 different chemoradiation therapy regimens. The RTQA results were evaluated from the PROCLAIM study, and the impact of irradiation deviations on efficacy outcomes was investigated.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The study was conducted from 2008 to 2014. Review of the irradiation plan was mandated for all patients. Real-time review was performed prior to irradiation start for the first enrolled patient at each site and randomly in 20% of additional patients, with non-real-time review in the remainder. The RTQA criteria evaluated included planning target volume coverage, dose homogeneity, volume of lung receiving ≥20 Gy, and maximum point dose to spinal cord.

RESULTS

Major RTQA violations occurred in 40 of 554 patients, treated at 28 sites. Seven sites treated ≥2 patients with major violations. Stage IIIB disease and larger planning target volume were observed more frequently in patients with major violations. Major violations were more prevalent in sites treating either <6 patients or >15 patients. Patients treated at sites enrolling ≥2 patients with major violations (n = 86) had lower median overall survival (21.1 months vs 29.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.442) and progression-free survival (7.3 months vs 11.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.345) than patients treated at sites without major violations. These findings remained significant for overall survival on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Major violations in treatment plans were uncommon in the PROCLAIM study, possibly reflecting mandatory RTQA. The RTQA violations were more frequent in patients requiring more complex chemoradiation therapy plans. Poorer observed outcomes at centers with multiple major violations are hypothesis generating.

Safety profiles of non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with pemetrexed plus carboplatin: a real-world retrospective, observational, cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Pemetrexed plus carboplatin (PCb) is a frequently used first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study examined the characteristics and safety profile of a NSCLC population treated with PCb area under the concentration-time curve 5 (PCb5) or 6 mg/mL•min (PCb6) under real-world conditions.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective, observational, cohort study was conducted, utilizing data from the IMS Oncology US clinic-based, longitudinal, patient-level electronic medical records (EMR), including patients with NSCLC on PCb5 or PCb6 regimens initiated concomitantly on or after the diagnosis of lung cancer during 2004-2014. Patient characteristics and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were described for each cohort. Propensity scores were calculated based on baseline demographic and clinical factors. Propensity score stratification was used to further adjust for cohort differences.

RESULTS

In total, 636 NSCLC patients receiving PCb5 (37% aged ≥70 years) and 184 patients receiving PCb6 (34% aged ≥70 years) who met the inclusion criteria were identified in the EMR. Patients with more comorbidities were more likely to have received PCb5. Overall incidence rates (IRs) per 100 person-years were similar for neutropenia in both cohorts, were numerically higher for anemia (IR = 43.6 vs 101.0) and thrombocytopenia (IR = 1.5 vs 17.9), and were numerically lower for nausea (IR = 14.4 vs 9.9) in the PCb6 vs PCb5 cohort. Within the PCb6 cohort, the IR per 100 person-years was higher for neutropenia for ≥70 year-old patients (IR = 41.1) compared to <70 year-old patients (IR = 14.5). After propensity score stratification, adjusted IRs showed similar patterns.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included lack of power for AEs other than anemia, given the nature of EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this real-world analysis add to existing evidence from randomized clinical trials about PCb safety profiles in the overall NSCLC population and in elderly patients. These results may guide physicians when making treatment decisions.

Long-term and low-grade safety results of a phase III study (PARAMOUNT): maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care immediately after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

In the PARAMOUNT ("A Phase 3, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed plus Best Supportive Care vs. Best Supportive Care Immediately Following Induction Treatment with Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer") trial, patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC) benefited from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin by extending survival, delaying disease progression, and maintaining quality of life (QoL). However, low-grade 1 or 2 toxicities during long-term maintenance treatment may become burdensome and impact QoL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients in this double-blind study (n = 539), who had completed 4 induction cycles (pemetrexed with cisplatin) without progressive disease (PD) and had an ECOG performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 to pemetrexed maintenance (500 mg/m(2), day 1) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC until PD. Adverse events (by maximum Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade) and QoL (EuroQol 5-dimensional [EQ-5D] scale) were assessed.

RESULTS

A median of 4 maintenance cycles was administered (range, pemetrexed 1-44; mean ± SD 7.9 ± 8.3; placebo 1-38; mean ± SD 5.0 ± 5.2), with 28% of pemetrexed and 12% of placebo patients receiving ≥ 10 maintenance cycles. The pemetrexed dose intensity was 94%. More patients receiving pemetrexed (12%) than placebo discontinued because of possible drug-related CTCAEs (4%; P = .005). Overall, pemetrexed was associated with significantly more (P < .05) low-grade events (grade 1/2 nausea, grade 2 anemia, edema, and neutropenia) than placebo. Overall, the incidence of low-grade fatigue, anemia, and neutropenia decreased with long-term pemetrexed exposure; however, renal events increased across treatment arms. EQ-5D analyses demonstrated no treatment-by-time interaction or overall treatment differences between the 2 arms.

CONCLUSION

PARAMOUNT demonstrated a low incidence of low-grade toxicities with long-term pemetrexed exposure without compromising QoL in patients with NS-NSCLC.

Final efficacy and safety results of pemetrexed (pem) continuation maintenance (mtc) therapy in the elderly from the PARAMOUNT phase III study

8068

Background: The PARAMOUNT phase III trial showed that mtc pem after pem-cisplatin induction was well tolerated and effective for patients (pts) with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Here we present the final OS and safety data from this study in elderly (≥70 yrs) vs. non-elderly (<70 yrs) pts. Methods: In this double-blind study, 539 pts with a PS of 0/1 were randomized (2:1, stratified for stage, PS and induction response) to receive mtc pem (n=359, 500 mg/m2, day 1, 21 day cycle) or placebo (plc) (n=180). The study was powered for PFS (previously reported) and key secondary OS. Subgroup analyses were done for pts ≥70 yrs and <70 yrs. Results: Subgroups (≥70: n=92, 17%; <70: n=447, 83%) had similar baseline characteristics except for PS and sex (elderly, PS 0/1: 22%/77%, M/F: 66%/34%; non-elderly, PS 0/1: 34%/65%, M/F: 56%/44%). The median ages were 73 yrs (≥70) and 60 yrs (<70). The mean cycles received for pts ≥70 were 7.4 (range 1-36, dose intensity (DI) 91%) for pem and 4.5 for plc, and for pts <70 were 8.0 (range 1-44, DI 94%) for pem and 5.1 for plc. The OS HRs (pem vs. plc) were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.55-1.4) for ≥70 yrs and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60-0.95, p=0.015) for<70 yrs. The median OS (95% CI) (≥70) was 13.7 mo (10.4-19.4) for pem and 12.1 mo (8.4-16.9) for plc; the median OS (95%CI) (<70) was 13.9 mo (12.5-16.1) for pem and 10.8 mo (9.5-12.9) for plc. The 1 and 2 yr OS rates (95% CI) for the elderly were 60% (45-71%) and 34% (21-47%) for pem vs. 52% (36-66%) and 28% (15-43%) for plc, respectively. For non-elderly pts, the 1 and 2 yr OS rates were 58% (52-63%) and 31% (26-37%) for pem vs. 43% (35-52%) and 19% (13-27%) for plc, respectively. The Table shows a subset of drug-related AEs. Conclusions: Continuation mtc pem had comparable survival and toxicity profiles in the ≥70 and <70 yrs subgroups. However, Gr 3/4 anemia and neutropenia were numerically higher for pts ≥70 yrs. Clinical trial information: NCT00789373. [Table: see text]

A phase II randomized study of cisplatin-pemetrexed plus either enzastaurin or placebo in chemonaive patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Enzastaurin is a serine/threonine kinase inhibitor that targets protein kinase C and AKT pathways. Enzastaurin and pemetrexed demonstrated synergy in preclinical studies. This trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of first-line enzastaurin plus cisplatin-pemetrexed in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

A safety lead-in phase (n = 13) of enzastaurin 125 or 250 mg twice daily was added to cisplatin-pemetrexed. A subsequent randomized, placebo-controlled phase II study (n = 22) of the combination was conducted to evaluate efficacy.

RESULTS

The combination was well tolerated and showed activity, with 7 (53.8%, 95% CI 26.7-80.9) confirmed partial responses and 2 stable diseases in 13 treated patients in the lead-in phase. However, the study was terminated early based on interim results from two phase II NSCLC studies of enzastaurin plus cytotoxic chemotherapy, which indicated no efficacy improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Enzastaurin and cisplatin-pemetrexed is tolerable with preliminary activity in patients with advanced NSCLC, but because of a lack of efficacy improvement in other phase II NSCLC studies, the study was terminated early.