ESMO Congress 2017

MADRID – Flotetuzumab, a novel bispecific monoclonal antibody that employs a proprietary technology to redirect T lymphocytes to kill CD123-expressing cells, was safe and demonstrated efficacy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia in a phase 1 trial, based on data presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress.

Flotetuzumab combines a portion of antibody recognizing CD3, which is an activating molecule expressed by T cells, and an arm that recognizes CD123 on the cancer cell, explained Norbert Vey, MD, PhD, Head, Leukemia Treatment Unit, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France. This bispecific quality, produced through a proprietary technology called Dual-Affinity ReTargeting, is considered promising because CD123 is expressed by more than 90% of AML cells and is highly expressed on stem cells involved in initiating myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS).

In this dose-ranging study (NCT02152956), 42 patients with AML and 5 patients with MDS were treated in the first cycle with infusions of flotetuzumab on either a continuous 7-day or a 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. For subsequent cycles, patients received the 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. Continuous infusion is employed due to the short half-life of flotetuzumab.

The most common adverse events were infusion-related reactions, which were observed in 76.6% of patients. Pyrexia, a potential sign of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), was observed in 23.4% of patients, who were given tocilizumab at the earliest sign of CRS. Two patients had grade 3 CRS, and one discontinued therapy. There was also one case of grade 3 myalgia. Dr. Vey characterized the overall level of adverse events as “acceptable.”

In addition to its relative safety, flotetuzumab was associated with “encouraging antileukemic activity,” Dr. Vey said. Six of 14 patients receiving doses that exceeded 500 ng/kg per day had objective responses and two of these patients had complete responses. Again, toxicity at these dose levels was considered manageable.

“This rate of clinical response is exciting,” commented Tim Somervaille, MD, Senior Group Leader, Leukemia Biology Laboratory, Cancer Research UK Institute, Manchester (England). An ESMO-invited discussant on this paper, Dr. Somervaille expressed enthusiasm in general about a growing role for bispecific T-cell engagers. Blinatumomab, the first of these agents, received regulatory approval for refractory AML in 2014.

“There are a number of these bispecific T cell antibodies that are in early-phase trials,” said Dr. Somervaille, citing several that also target CD123 within the context of a different partner antigen than that employed by flotetuzumab. He also mentioned ongoing efforts to develop bispecific natural killer cell engagers that target malignant cells through immune activation.

As for flotetuzumab, the phase 1 trial provided adequate data to encourage further development.

“A cohort expansion is now ongoing and enrolling patients at 11 sites in the United States and Europe,” Dr. Vey reported. “A clinical update on these results is expected by the end of the year.”

Dr. Vey reported financial relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Servier.

MacroGenics retains full development and commercialization rights to flotetuzumab in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, and India. Servier participates in the development and has rights to flotetuzumab in all other countries. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted orphan drug designation to flotetuzumab for the investigational treatment of AML, according to a press release from MacroGenics.

MADRID – Flotetuzumab, a novel bispecific monoclonal antibody that employs a proprietary technology to redirect T lymphocytes to kill CD123-expressing cells, was safe and demonstrated efficacy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia in a phase 1 trial, based on data presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress.

Flotetuzumab combines a portion of antibody recognizing CD3, which is an activating molecule expressed by T cells, and an arm that recognizes CD123 on the cancer cell, explained Norbert Vey, MD, PhD, Head, Leukemia Treatment Unit, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France. This bispecific quality, produced through a proprietary technology called Dual-Affinity ReTargeting, is considered promising because CD123 is expressed by more than 90% of AML cells and is highly expressed on stem cells involved in initiating myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS).

In this dose-ranging study (NCT02152956), 42 patients with AML and 5 patients with MDS were treated in the first cycle with infusions of flotetuzumab on either a continuous 7-day or a 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. For subsequent cycles, patients received the 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. Continuous infusion is employed due to the short half-life of flotetuzumab.

The most common adverse events were infusion-related reactions, which were observed in 76.6% of patients. Pyrexia, a potential sign of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), was observed in 23.4% of patients, who were given tocilizumab at the earliest sign of CRS. Two patients had grade 3 CRS, and one discontinued therapy. There was also one case of grade 3 myalgia. Dr. Vey characterized the overall level of adverse events as “acceptable.”

In addition to its relative safety, flotetuzumab was associated with “encouraging antileukemic activity,” Dr. Vey said. Six of 14 patients receiving doses that exceeded 500 ng/kg per day had objective responses and two of these patients had complete responses. Again, toxicity at these dose levels was considered manageable.

“This rate of clinical response is exciting,” commented Tim Somervaille, MD, Senior Group Leader, Leukemia Biology Laboratory, Cancer Research UK Institute, Manchester (England). An ESMO-invited discussant on this paper, Dr. Somervaille expressed enthusiasm in general about a growing role for bispecific T-cell engagers. Blinatumomab, the first of these agents, received regulatory approval for refractory AML in 2014.

“There are a number of these bispecific T cell antibodies that are in early-phase trials,” said Dr. Somervaille, citing several that also target CD123 within the context of a different partner antigen than that employed by flotetuzumab. He also mentioned ongoing efforts to develop bispecific natural killer cell engagers that target malignant cells through immune activation.

As for flotetuzumab, the phase 1 trial provided adequate data to encourage further development.

“A cohort expansion is now ongoing and enrolling patients at 11 sites in the United States and Europe,” Dr. Vey reported. “A clinical update on these results is expected by the end of the year.”

Dr. Vey reported financial relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Servier.

MacroGenics retains full development and commercialization rights to flotetuzumab in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, and India. Servier participates in the development and has rights to flotetuzumab in all other countries. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted orphan drug designation to flotetuzumab for the investigational treatment of AML, according to a press release from MacroGenics.

MADRID – Flotetuzumab, a novel bispecific monoclonal antibody that employs a proprietary technology to redirect T lymphocytes to kill CD123-expressing cells, was safe and demonstrated efficacy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia in a phase 1 trial, based on data presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress.

Flotetuzumab combines a portion of antibody recognizing CD3, which is an activating molecule expressed by T cells, and an arm that recognizes CD123 on the cancer cell, explained Norbert Vey, MD, PhD, Head, Leukemia Treatment Unit, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France. This bispecific quality, produced through a proprietary technology called Dual-Affinity ReTargeting, is considered promising because CD123 is expressed by more than 90% of AML cells and is highly expressed on stem cells involved in initiating myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS).

In this dose-ranging study (NCT02152956), 42 patients with AML and 5 patients with MDS were treated in the first cycle with infusions of flotetuzumab on either a continuous 7-day or a 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. For subsequent cycles, patients received the 4-days-on, 3-days-off schedule. Continuous infusion is employed due to the short half-life of flotetuzumab.

The most common adverse events were infusion-related reactions, which were observed in 76.6% of patients. Pyrexia, a potential sign of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), was observed in 23.4% of patients, who were given tocilizumab at the earliest sign of CRS. Two patients had grade 3 CRS, and one discontinued therapy. There was also one case of grade 3 myalgia. Dr. Vey characterized the overall level of adverse events as “acceptable.”

In addition to its relative safety, flotetuzumab was associated with “encouraging antileukemic activity,” Dr. Vey said. Six of 14 patients receiving doses that exceeded 500 ng/kg per day had objective responses and two of these patients had complete responses. Again, toxicity at these dose levels was considered manageable.

“This rate of clinical response is exciting,” commented Tim Somervaille, MD, Senior Group Leader, Leukemia Biology Laboratory, Cancer Research UK Institute, Manchester (England). An ESMO-invited discussant on this paper, Dr. Somervaille expressed enthusiasm in general about a growing role for bispecific T-cell engagers. Blinatumomab, the first of these agents, received regulatory approval for refractory AML in 2014.

“There are a number of these bispecific T cell antibodies that are in early-phase trials,” said Dr. Somervaille, citing several that also target CD123 within the context of a different partner antigen than that employed by flotetuzumab. He also mentioned ongoing efforts to develop bispecific natural killer cell engagers that target malignant cells through immune activation.

As for flotetuzumab, the phase 1 trial provided adequate data to encourage further development.

“A cohort expansion is now ongoing and enrolling patients at 11 sites in the United States and Europe,” Dr. Vey reported. “A clinical update on these results is expected by the end of the year.”

Dr. Vey reported financial relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Servier.

MacroGenics retains full development and commercialization rights to flotetuzumab in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, and India. Servier participates in the development and has rights to flotetuzumab in all other countries. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted orphan drug designation to flotetuzumab for the investigational treatment of AML, according to a press release from MacroGenics.

MADRID – Patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma had similar rates of progression-free survival (PFS) whether they were younger than age 65 or 65 years and older, based on the results of eight recent phase 3 trials in an analysis presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

“The PFS benefit was significant in both younger and older patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma with a cut off at 75 years,” reported Thierry Landre, PharmD, of the department of geriatric oncology, University of Paris 13, France. “Age, by itself, should not be a contraindication to the new myeloma drugs.”

In this meta-analysis, 5,421 patients were evaluated from the CASTOR and POLLUX trials, which evaluated daratumumab; the ELOQUENT-2 trial, which evaluated elotuzumab; the ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials, which evaluated carfilzomib; the TOURMALINE-MM trial, which evaluated ixazomib; the PANORAMA trial, which evaluated panobinostat; and the VANTAGE trial, which evaluated vorinostat.

For the analysis, patients were stratified by age younger than 65 years and age 65 years and older. Hazard ratios for benefit were calculated for the experimental and comparator arm for these two age groups. Though the number of patients over age 75 was small, hazard ratios were determined on an exploratory basis for that age group.

For the experimental arm relative to the comparator arm, all hazard ratios were statistically significant for patients less than age 65 with the exception of patients receiving elotuzumab in ELOQUENT-2. In that trial, the hazard ratio slightly exceeded the upward bound of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI, 0.55-1.02).

When the data were combined for the eight trials, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.62 for newer agents relative to the comparator arms.

Similar results were seen for individual trial and aggregated trial data when the same calculations were done in patients aged 65-75. When the data for the eight trials were combined, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.67 for newer agents relative to comparators.

The calculations for patients over age 75 were more limited because of the small numbers of trial participants in that age group. Of the hazard ratio estimates that were done, however, they were again of the same general magnitude seen in younger patients.

When PFS was broken down by type of therapy, the hazard ratios for patients younger than age 65 and those aged 65-75 were 0.57 and 0.52, respectively, for monoclonal antibodies. For combined data with the histone deacetylase inhibitors panobinostat and vorinostat, the respective hazard ratios were 0.67 and 0.78, respectively. For the second generation proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib, the respective hazard ratios were 0.61 and 0.70.

The ESMO-invited discussant for this presentation, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens, called the results reassuring. These data support treating relatively fit elderly patients with the newer agents.

“The data with the monoclonal antibodies suggest that these drugs actually provide their best results in elderly patients,” noted Dr. Terpos, pointing to the numerical advantage for the hazard ratio in older versus younger patients. The efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in older patients was further reinforced by the narrow confidence interval (95% CI, 0.42-0.61).

“There are many new drugs in the refractory setting [of multiple myeloma],” Dr. Terpos remarked. “It is helpful to have some data to show that these are also beneficial in the age group where this disease is most common.”

Dr. Landre agreed, noting that the median age at diagnosis of multiple myeloma is 69. This analysis helps to address the gap of “data available for evaluating efficacy in those older than 65 years and older than 75 years of age.”

MADRID – Patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma had similar rates of progression-free survival (PFS) whether they were younger than age 65 or 65 years and older, based on the results of eight recent phase 3 trials in an analysis presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

“The PFS benefit was significant in both younger and older patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma with a cut off at 75 years,” reported Thierry Landre, PharmD, of the department of geriatric oncology, University of Paris 13, France. “Age, by itself, should not be a contraindication to the new myeloma drugs.”

In this meta-analysis, 5,421 patients were evaluated from the CASTOR and POLLUX trials, which evaluated daratumumab; the ELOQUENT-2 trial, which evaluated elotuzumab; the ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials, which evaluated carfilzomib; the TOURMALINE-MM trial, which evaluated ixazomib; the PANORAMA trial, which evaluated panobinostat; and the VANTAGE trial, which evaluated vorinostat.

For the analysis, patients were stratified by age younger than 65 years and age 65 years and older. Hazard ratios for benefit were calculated for the experimental and comparator arm for these two age groups. Though the number of patients over age 75 was small, hazard ratios were determined on an exploratory basis for that age group.

For the experimental arm relative to the comparator arm, all hazard ratios were statistically significant for patients less than age 65 with the exception of patients receiving elotuzumab in ELOQUENT-2. In that trial, the hazard ratio slightly exceeded the upward bound of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI, 0.55-1.02).

When the data were combined for the eight trials, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.62 for newer agents relative to the comparator arms.

Similar results were seen for individual trial and aggregated trial data when the same calculations were done in patients aged 65-75. When the data for the eight trials were combined, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.67 for newer agents relative to comparators.

The calculations for patients over age 75 were more limited because of the small numbers of trial participants in that age group. Of the hazard ratio estimates that were done, however, they were again of the same general magnitude seen in younger patients.

When PFS was broken down by type of therapy, the hazard ratios for patients younger than age 65 and those aged 65-75 were 0.57 and 0.52, respectively, for monoclonal antibodies. For combined data with the histone deacetylase inhibitors panobinostat and vorinostat, the respective hazard ratios were 0.67 and 0.78, respectively. For the second generation proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib, the respective hazard ratios were 0.61 and 0.70.

The ESMO-invited discussant for this presentation, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens, called the results reassuring. These data support treating relatively fit elderly patients with the newer agents.

“The data with the monoclonal antibodies suggest that these drugs actually provide their best results in elderly patients,” noted Dr. Terpos, pointing to the numerical advantage for the hazard ratio in older versus younger patients. The efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in older patients was further reinforced by the narrow confidence interval (95% CI, 0.42-0.61).

“There are many new drugs in the refractory setting [of multiple myeloma],” Dr. Terpos remarked. “It is helpful to have some data to show that these are also beneficial in the age group where this disease is most common.”

Dr. Landre agreed, noting that the median age at diagnosis of multiple myeloma is 69. This analysis helps to address the gap of “data available for evaluating efficacy in those older than 65 years and older than 75 years of age.”

MADRID – Patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma had similar rates of progression-free survival (PFS) whether they were younger than age 65 or 65 years and older, based on the results of eight recent phase 3 trials in an analysis presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

“The PFS benefit was significant in both younger and older patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma with a cut off at 75 years,” reported Thierry Landre, PharmD, of the department of geriatric oncology, University of Paris 13, France. “Age, by itself, should not be a contraindication to the new myeloma drugs.”

In this meta-analysis, 5,421 patients were evaluated from the CASTOR and POLLUX trials, which evaluated daratumumab; the ELOQUENT-2 trial, which evaluated elotuzumab; the ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials, which evaluated carfilzomib; the TOURMALINE-MM trial, which evaluated ixazomib; the PANORAMA trial, which evaluated panobinostat; and the VANTAGE trial, which evaluated vorinostat.

For the analysis, patients were stratified by age younger than 65 years and age 65 years and older. Hazard ratios for benefit were calculated for the experimental and comparator arm for these two age groups. Though the number of patients over age 75 was small, hazard ratios were determined on an exploratory basis for that age group.

For the experimental arm relative to the comparator arm, all hazard ratios were statistically significant for patients less than age 65 with the exception of patients receiving elotuzumab in ELOQUENT-2. In that trial, the hazard ratio slightly exceeded the upward bound of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI, 0.55-1.02).

When the data were combined for the eight trials, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.62 for newer agents relative to the comparator arms.

Similar results were seen for individual trial and aggregated trial data when the same calculations were done in patients aged 65-75. When the data for the eight trials were combined, the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.67 for newer agents relative to comparators.

The calculations for patients over age 75 were more limited because of the small numbers of trial participants in that age group. Of the hazard ratio estimates that were done, however, they were again of the same general magnitude seen in younger patients.

When PFS was broken down by type of therapy, the hazard ratios for patients younger than age 65 and those aged 65-75 were 0.57 and 0.52, respectively, for monoclonal antibodies. For combined data with the histone deacetylase inhibitors panobinostat and vorinostat, the respective hazard ratios were 0.67 and 0.78, respectively. For the second generation proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib, the respective hazard ratios were 0.61 and 0.70.

The ESMO-invited discussant for this presentation, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens, called the results reassuring. These data support treating relatively fit elderly patients with the newer agents.

“The data with the monoclonal antibodies suggest that these drugs actually provide their best results in elderly patients,” noted Dr. Terpos, pointing to the numerical advantage for the hazard ratio in older versus younger patients. The efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in older patients was further reinforced by the narrow confidence interval (95% CI, 0.42-0.61).

“There are many new drugs in the refractory setting [of multiple myeloma],” Dr. Terpos remarked. “It is helpful to have some data to show that these are also beneficial in the age group where this disease is most common.”

Dr. Landre agreed, noting that the median age at diagnosis of multiple myeloma is 69. This analysis helps to address the gap of “data available for evaluating efficacy in those older than 65 years and older than 75 years of age.”

Micrograph showing MDS

MADRID—Interim results of a phase 1 study suggest flotetuzumab, a CD123 and CD3 bispecific antibody, may be a feasible treatment option for relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or intermediate/high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Researchers said flotetuzumab demonstrated acceptable tolerability in the dose-escalation portion of the study, with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) being the most common adverse events (AEs).

In addition, flotetuzumab exhibited anti-leukemic activity in 8 of 14 response-evaluable patients, with 6 patients achieving a response.

Norbert Vey, MD, of Institut Paoli-Calmettes in Marseille, France, presented these results at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 995O*). The study is sponsored by MacroGenics, Inc., the company developing flotetuzumab.

Flotetuzumab (MGD006) recognizes CD123 and CD3. The primary mechanism of flotetuzumab is thought to be its ability to redirect T cells to kill CD123-expressing cells. To achieve this, the molecule combines a portion of an antibody recognizing CD3 (an activating molecule expressed by T cells) with an arm that recognizes CD123 on the target cancer cells.

In this ongoing phase 1 study of flotetuzumab, researchers have enrolled 47 patients with a median age of 64 (range, 29-84). About 89% of these patients had AML (n=42), and the rest (n=5) had MDS.

Twenty-four percent had relapsed AML (n=10), 55% had refractory AML (n=23), and 21% had failed treatment with hypomethylating agents (n=9). One patient had intermediate-1-risk MDS, 2 had intermediate-2-risk, and 2 had high-risk MDS.

Treatment

The study began with single patients receiving flotetuzumab at escalating doses—3 ng/kg/day, 10 ng/kg/day, 30 ng/kg/day, and 100 ng/kg/day.

Then, patients received a range of doses on 2 different schedules for cycle 1. One group received treatment 7 days a week. The other had a 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

All patients received a lead-in dose during the first week of cycle 1. They received 30 ng/kg/day for 3 days, then 100 ng/kg/day for 4 days.

For the rest of cycle 1, patients in the 4 days/3 days group received doses of 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg. Patients in the daily dosing group received doses of 300 ng/kg, 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg.

For cycle 2 and beyond, all patients were on the 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

Safety

The maximum tolerated dose and schedule was 500 ng/kg/day for 7 days.

Dose-limiting toxicities occurring at the 700 ng/kg/day dose included grade 2 IRRs/CRS in 2 patients and grade 3 myalgia in 1 patient. There was 1 drug-related central nervous system AE that led to treatment discontinuation.

IRRs/CRS occurred in 77% of patients, with 13% of patients having grade 3 events and 8.5% of patients discontinuing treatment due to IRRs/CRS.

The researchers said they found ways to decrease the incidence and severity of CRS. One is early intervention with tocilizumab. The other is a 2-step lead-in dose during week 1. So patients first receive 30 ng/kg, then 100 ng/kg, and then their target dose.

Other grade 3 AEs occurring in this trial include febrile neutropenia (11%), anemia (11%), and decreases in platelets (13%), white blood cells (11%), and lymphocytes (13%).

Efficacy

The researchers said they observed encouraging anti-leukemic activity in patients treated at 500 ng/kg/day or greater.

As of the data cut-off, 14 patients treated at this dose were evaluable for response. Eight (57%) patients had anti-leukemic activity, with 6 (43%) of these patients experiencing an objective response.

One patient achieved a complete response (CR), 2 had a CR with incomplete count recovery, and 1 had a molecular CR.

In most responders, anti-leukemic activity was observed after a single cycle of therapy.

MacroGenics is currently enrolling patients in dose-expansion cohorts. The company plans to present updated results from this trial at another scientific conference later this year.

*Slides from this presentation are available on the MacroGenics website at http://ir.macrogenics.com/events.cfm.

Micrograph showing MDS

MADRID—Interim results of a phase 1 study suggest flotetuzumab, a CD123 and CD3 bispecific antibody, may be a feasible treatment option for relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or intermediate/high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Researchers said flotetuzumab demonstrated acceptable tolerability in the dose-escalation portion of the study, with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) being the most common adverse events (AEs).

In addition, flotetuzumab exhibited anti-leukemic activity in 8 of 14 response-evaluable patients, with 6 patients achieving a response.

Norbert Vey, MD, of Institut Paoli-Calmettes in Marseille, France, presented these results at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 995O*). The study is sponsored by MacroGenics, Inc., the company developing flotetuzumab.

Flotetuzumab (MGD006) recognizes CD123 and CD3. The primary mechanism of flotetuzumab is thought to be its ability to redirect T cells to kill CD123-expressing cells. To achieve this, the molecule combines a portion of an antibody recognizing CD3 (an activating molecule expressed by T cells) with an arm that recognizes CD123 on the target cancer cells.

In this ongoing phase 1 study of flotetuzumab, researchers have enrolled 47 patients with a median age of 64 (range, 29-84). About 89% of these patients had AML (n=42), and the rest (n=5) had MDS.

Twenty-four percent had relapsed AML (n=10), 55% had refractory AML (n=23), and 21% had failed treatment with hypomethylating agents (n=9). One patient had intermediate-1-risk MDS, 2 had intermediate-2-risk, and 2 had high-risk MDS.

Treatment

The study began with single patients receiving flotetuzumab at escalating doses—3 ng/kg/day, 10 ng/kg/day, 30 ng/kg/day, and 100 ng/kg/day.

Then, patients received a range of doses on 2 different schedules for cycle 1. One group received treatment 7 days a week. The other had a 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

All patients received a lead-in dose during the first week of cycle 1. They received 30 ng/kg/day for 3 days, then 100 ng/kg/day for 4 days.

For the rest of cycle 1, patients in the 4 days/3 days group received doses of 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg. Patients in the daily dosing group received doses of 300 ng/kg, 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg.

For cycle 2 and beyond, all patients were on the 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

Safety

The maximum tolerated dose and schedule was 500 ng/kg/day for 7 days.

Dose-limiting toxicities occurring at the 700 ng/kg/day dose included grade 2 IRRs/CRS in 2 patients and grade 3 myalgia in 1 patient. There was 1 drug-related central nervous system AE that led to treatment discontinuation.

IRRs/CRS occurred in 77% of patients, with 13% of patients having grade 3 events and 8.5% of patients discontinuing treatment due to IRRs/CRS.

The researchers said they found ways to decrease the incidence and severity of CRS. One is early intervention with tocilizumab. The other is a 2-step lead-in dose during week 1. So patients first receive 30 ng/kg, then 100 ng/kg, and then their target dose.

Other grade 3 AEs occurring in this trial include febrile neutropenia (11%), anemia (11%), and decreases in platelets (13%), white blood cells (11%), and lymphocytes (13%).

Efficacy

The researchers said they observed encouraging anti-leukemic activity in patients treated at 500 ng/kg/day or greater.

As of the data cut-off, 14 patients treated at this dose were evaluable for response. Eight (57%) patients had anti-leukemic activity, with 6 (43%) of these patients experiencing an objective response.

One patient achieved a complete response (CR), 2 had a CR with incomplete count recovery, and 1 had a molecular CR.

In most responders, anti-leukemic activity was observed after a single cycle of therapy.

MacroGenics is currently enrolling patients in dose-expansion cohorts. The company plans to present updated results from this trial at another scientific conference later this year.

*Slides from this presentation are available on the MacroGenics website at http://ir.macrogenics.com/events.cfm.

Micrograph showing MDS

MADRID—Interim results of a phase 1 study suggest flotetuzumab, a CD123 and CD3 bispecific antibody, may be a feasible treatment option for relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or intermediate/high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Researchers said flotetuzumab demonstrated acceptable tolerability in the dose-escalation portion of the study, with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) being the most common adverse events (AEs).

In addition, flotetuzumab exhibited anti-leukemic activity in 8 of 14 response-evaluable patients, with 6 patients achieving a response.

Norbert Vey, MD, of Institut Paoli-Calmettes in Marseille, France, presented these results at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 995O*). The study is sponsored by MacroGenics, Inc., the company developing flotetuzumab.

Flotetuzumab (MGD006) recognizes CD123 and CD3. The primary mechanism of flotetuzumab is thought to be its ability to redirect T cells to kill CD123-expressing cells. To achieve this, the molecule combines a portion of an antibody recognizing CD3 (an activating molecule expressed by T cells) with an arm that recognizes CD123 on the target cancer cells.

In this ongoing phase 1 study of flotetuzumab, researchers have enrolled 47 patients with a median age of 64 (range, 29-84). About 89% of these patients had AML (n=42), and the rest (n=5) had MDS.

Twenty-four percent had relapsed AML (n=10), 55% had refractory AML (n=23), and 21% had failed treatment with hypomethylating agents (n=9). One patient had intermediate-1-risk MDS, 2 had intermediate-2-risk, and 2 had high-risk MDS.

Treatment

The study began with single patients receiving flotetuzumab at escalating doses—3 ng/kg/day, 10 ng/kg/day, 30 ng/kg/day, and 100 ng/kg/day.

Then, patients received a range of doses on 2 different schedules for cycle 1. One group received treatment 7 days a week. The other had a 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

All patients received a lead-in dose during the first week of cycle 1. They received 30 ng/kg/day for 3 days, then 100 ng/kg/day for 4 days.

For the rest of cycle 1, patients in the 4 days/3 days group received doses of 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg. Patients in the daily dosing group received doses of 300 ng/kg, 500 ng/kg, 700 ng/kg, 900 ng/kg, or 1000 ng/kg.

For cycle 2 and beyond, all patients were on the 4-days-on/3-days-off schedule.

Safety

The maximum tolerated dose and schedule was 500 ng/kg/day for 7 days.

Dose-limiting toxicities occurring at the 700 ng/kg/day dose included grade 2 IRRs/CRS in 2 patients and grade 3 myalgia in 1 patient. There was 1 drug-related central nervous system AE that led to treatment discontinuation.

IRRs/CRS occurred in 77% of patients, with 13% of patients having grade 3 events and 8.5% of patients discontinuing treatment due to IRRs/CRS.

The researchers said they found ways to decrease the incidence and severity of CRS. One is early intervention with tocilizumab. The other is a 2-step lead-in dose during week 1. So patients first receive 30 ng/kg, then 100 ng/kg, and then their target dose.

Other grade 3 AEs occurring in this trial include febrile neutropenia (11%), anemia (11%), and decreases in platelets (13%), white blood cells (11%), and lymphocytes (13%).

Efficacy

The researchers said they observed encouraging anti-leukemic activity in patients treated at 500 ng/kg/day or greater.

As of the data cut-off, 14 patients treated at this dose were evaluable for response. Eight (57%) patients had anti-leukemic activity, with 6 (43%) of these patients experiencing an objective response.

One patient achieved a complete response (CR), 2 had a CR with incomplete count recovery, and 1 had a molecular CR.

In most responders, anti-leukemic activity was observed after a single cycle of therapy.

MacroGenics is currently enrolling patients in dose-expansion cohorts. The company plans to present updated results from this trial at another scientific conference later this year.

*Slides from this presentation are available on the MacroGenics website at http://ir.macrogenics.com/events.cfm.

Madrid – A combination of the investigational cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) agent abemaciclib and a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with a near doubling of progression-free survival in postmenopausal women with previously untreated hormone-receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer.

At a planned 18-month interim analysis of the MONARCH 3 trial, the median investigator-assessed progression free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, had not been reached for 328 patients assigned to receive abemaciclib with either anastrozole (Arimidex) or letrozole (Femara). In contrast, the median PFS for 165 patients assigned to an AI and a placebo was 14.7 months, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.543 (P = .000021), reported Angelo Di Leo, MD, of Hospital of Prato, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Prato, Italy.

“Abemaciclib in combination with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor is superior to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor alone in terms of progression-free survival, but also in terms of the objective response rate as the initial treatment of HER2-negative, endocrine sensitive advanced breast cancer,” he said at a briefing prior to his presentation of the data in a presidential symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Neil Osterweil/Frontline Medical News

op@frontlinemedcom.com

Madrid – A combination of the investigational cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) agent abemaciclib and a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with a near doubling of progression-free survival in postmenopausal women with previously untreated hormone-receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer.

At a planned 18-month interim analysis of the MONARCH 3 trial, the median investigator-assessed progression free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, had not been reached for 328 patients assigned to receive abemaciclib with either anastrozole (Arimidex) or letrozole (Femara). In contrast, the median PFS for 165 patients assigned to an AI and a placebo was 14.7 months, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.543 (P = .000021), reported Angelo Di Leo, MD, of Hospital of Prato, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Prato, Italy.

“Abemaciclib in combination with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor is superior to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor alone in terms of progression-free survival, but also in terms of the objective response rate as the initial treatment of HER2-negative, endocrine sensitive advanced breast cancer,” he said at a briefing prior to his presentation of the data in a presidential symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Neil Osterweil/Frontline Medical News

op@frontlinemedcom.com

Madrid – A combination of the investigational cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) agent abemaciclib and a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) was associated with a near doubling of progression-free survival in postmenopausal women with previously untreated hormone-receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer.

At a planned 18-month interim analysis of the MONARCH 3 trial, the median investigator-assessed progression free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, had not been reached for 328 patients assigned to receive abemaciclib with either anastrozole (Arimidex) or letrozole (Femara). In contrast, the median PFS for 165 patients assigned to an AI and a placebo was 14.7 months, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.543 (P = .000021), reported Angelo Di Leo, MD, of Hospital of Prato, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Prato, Italy.

“Abemaciclib in combination with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor is superior to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor alone in terms of progression-free survival, but also in terms of the objective response rate as the initial treatment of HER2-negative, endocrine sensitive advanced breast cancer,” he said at a briefing prior to his presentation of the data in a presidential symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Neil Osterweil/Frontline Medical News

op@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – Radioactive iodine treatment is associated with nearly twice the risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer, based on data from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry.

Up to 40% of patients in Europe and North America with well-differentiated thyroid cancer still receive radioactive iodine treatment “even though RAI has no proven benefit in this population,” Remco Molenaar, MD, PhD, of the University of Amsterdam reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology Congress.

Of 148,215 patients treated for well-differentiated thyroid cancer between 1973 and 2014, 55% had surgery only and 45% received surgery plus radioactive iodine treatment. After a median 4.3 years of follow-up, 44 patients developed AML. When cases in those exposed to RAI were cross-referenced to those who were not, the relative risk was increased more than fivefold. When the analysis controlled for an extensive list of potentially confounding variables, the hazard ratio of 1.79 remained statistically significant (P = .03).

“There is a nearly twofold increased risk even though radioactive iodine treatment is not indicated in this population,” Dr. Molenaar said. Moreover, AML following treatment for well-differentiated thyroid cancer was associated with a substantial reduction in expected overall survival, falling from a median 24.4 years to 7.5 years.

Compared with other AML patients, “those who develop AML after RAI also have a worse prognosis,” added Dr. Molenaar, noting the difference in overall survival is highly statistically significant (1.2 vs. 3.5 years; P = .004).

The ESMO-invited discussant, Tim Somervaille, MD, senior group leader of the Leukemia Biology Laboratory at the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, called this analysis “a more thorough and detailed study” than previous retrospective analyses, but he added a note of caution: Despite the almost twofold increase in risk, AML remains a rare iatrogenic event in thyroid cancer patients even if it is avoidable by withholding RAI therapy.

“These data do suggest that the risk is measurable and will further provide some downward pressure on the numbers of patients having unnecessary RAI therapy for well-differentiated thyroid cancer,” he said.

In the discussion that followed the presentation, one audience member suggested that telling patients they have a twofold increased risk of AML after RAI therapy is misleading. It was emphasized that a twofold increase of a very small number is still a very small number, but Dr. Molenaar suggested that this misses the point.

“I don’t think this is something that you need to discuss with patients, because you should not be giving RAI therapy to thyroid cancer patients with low- or intermediate-risk disease,” he said. Any AML case caused “by a therapy with no proven benefit is one too many,” especially since unnecessary RAI adds inconvenience and cost to treatment.

cenews@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – Radioactive iodine treatment is associated with nearly twice the risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer, based on data from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry.

Up to 40% of patients in Europe and North America with well-differentiated thyroid cancer still receive radioactive iodine treatment “even though RAI has no proven benefit in this population,” Remco Molenaar, MD, PhD, of the University of Amsterdam reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology Congress.

Of 148,215 patients treated for well-differentiated thyroid cancer between 1973 and 2014, 55% had surgery only and 45% received surgery plus radioactive iodine treatment. After a median 4.3 years of follow-up, 44 patients developed AML. When cases in those exposed to RAI were cross-referenced to those who were not, the relative risk was increased more than fivefold. When the analysis controlled for an extensive list of potentially confounding variables, the hazard ratio of 1.79 remained statistically significant (P = .03).

“There is a nearly twofold increased risk even though radioactive iodine treatment is not indicated in this population,” Dr. Molenaar said. Moreover, AML following treatment for well-differentiated thyroid cancer was associated with a substantial reduction in expected overall survival, falling from a median 24.4 years to 7.5 years.

Compared with other AML patients, “those who develop AML after RAI also have a worse prognosis,” added Dr. Molenaar, noting the difference in overall survival is highly statistically significant (1.2 vs. 3.5 years; P = .004).

The ESMO-invited discussant, Tim Somervaille, MD, senior group leader of the Leukemia Biology Laboratory at the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, called this analysis “a more thorough and detailed study” than previous retrospective analyses, but he added a note of caution: Despite the almost twofold increase in risk, AML remains a rare iatrogenic event in thyroid cancer patients even if it is avoidable by withholding RAI therapy.

“These data do suggest that the risk is measurable and will further provide some downward pressure on the numbers of patients having unnecessary RAI therapy for well-differentiated thyroid cancer,” he said.

In the discussion that followed the presentation, one audience member suggested that telling patients they have a twofold increased risk of AML after RAI therapy is misleading. It was emphasized that a twofold increase of a very small number is still a very small number, but Dr. Molenaar suggested that this misses the point.

“I don’t think this is something that you need to discuss with patients, because you should not be giving RAI therapy to thyroid cancer patients with low- or intermediate-risk disease,” he said. Any AML case caused “by a therapy with no proven benefit is one too many,” especially since unnecessary RAI adds inconvenience and cost to treatment.

cenews@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – Radioactive iodine treatment is associated with nearly twice the risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer, based on data from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry.

Up to 40% of patients in Europe and North America with well-differentiated thyroid cancer still receive radioactive iodine treatment “even though RAI has no proven benefit in this population,” Remco Molenaar, MD, PhD, of the University of Amsterdam reported at the European Society of Medical Oncology Congress.

Of 148,215 patients treated for well-differentiated thyroid cancer between 1973 and 2014, 55% had surgery only and 45% received surgery plus radioactive iodine treatment. After a median 4.3 years of follow-up, 44 patients developed AML. When cases in those exposed to RAI were cross-referenced to those who were not, the relative risk was increased more than fivefold. When the analysis controlled for an extensive list of potentially confounding variables, the hazard ratio of 1.79 remained statistically significant (P = .03).

“There is a nearly twofold increased risk even though radioactive iodine treatment is not indicated in this population,” Dr. Molenaar said. Moreover, AML following treatment for well-differentiated thyroid cancer was associated with a substantial reduction in expected overall survival, falling from a median 24.4 years to 7.5 years.

Compared with other AML patients, “those who develop AML after RAI also have a worse prognosis,” added Dr. Molenaar, noting the difference in overall survival is highly statistically significant (1.2 vs. 3.5 years; P = .004).

The ESMO-invited discussant, Tim Somervaille, MD, senior group leader of the Leukemia Biology Laboratory at the Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, called this analysis “a more thorough and detailed study” than previous retrospective analyses, but he added a note of caution: Despite the almost twofold increase in risk, AML remains a rare iatrogenic event in thyroid cancer patients even if it is avoidable by withholding RAI therapy.

“These data do suggest that the risk is measurable and will further provide some downward pressure on the numbers of patients having unnecessary RAI therapy for well-differentiated thyroid cancer,” he said.

In the discussion that followed the presentation, one audience member suggested that telling patients they have a twofold increased risk of AML after RAI therapy is misleading. It was emphasized that a twofold increase of a very small number is still a very small number, but Dr. Molenaar suggested that this misses the point.

“I don’t think this is something that you need to discuss with patients, because you should not be giving RAI therapy to thyroid cancer patients with low- or intermediate-risk disease,” he said. Any AML case caused “by a therapy with no proven benefit is one too many,” especially since unnecessary RAI adds inconvenience and cost to treatment.

cenews@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – Adding the investigational PI3K inhibitor taselisib to letrozole (Femara) significantly improved overall response rates, compared with neoadjuvant letrozole alone, in postmenopausal women with early estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (ER+/HER2–) breast cancer, results of the LORELEI trial show.

In this phase 2 trial, the overall response rate (ORR), the primary endpoint, was 50% for 166 patients assigned to letrozole plus taselisib, compared with 39.3% for 168 patients assigned to letrozole plus placebo, reported Cristina Saura, MD, of Vall d’Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona.

MADRID – Adding the investigational PI3K inhibitor taselisib to letrozole (Femara) significantly improved overall response rates, compared with neoadjuvant letrozole alone, in postmenopausal women with early estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (ER+/HER2–) breast cancer, results of the LORELEI trial show.

In this phase 2 trial, the overall response rate (ORR), the primary endpoint, was 50% for 166 patients assigned to letrozole plus taselisib, compared with 39.3% for 168 patients assigned to letrozole plus placebo, reported Cristina Saura, MD, of Vall d’Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona.

MADRID – Adding the investigational PI3K inhibitor taselisib to letrozole (Femara) significantly improved overall response rates, compared with neoadjuvant letrozole alone, in postmenopausal women with early estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (ER+/HER2–) breast cancer, results of the LORELEI trial show.

In this phase 2 trial, the overall response rate (ORR), the primary endpoint, was 50% for 166 patients assigned to letrozole plus taselisib, compared with 39.3% for 168 patients assigned to letrozole plus placebo, reported Cristina Saura, MD, of Vall d’Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona.

Photo by Rhoda Baer

MADRID—New research indicates there is a lack of specialized care in Europe for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer.

In a survey of more than 200 European healthcare professionals, more than two-thirds of respondents said they did not have access to specialized services where adult and pediatric cancer specialists work together to plan treatment and deliver care to AYAs with cancer.

This lack of services was more pronounced in Eastern and Southern Europe than Western and Northern Europe.

“The survey found gaps and disparities in cancer care for adolescents and young adults across Europe,” said study author Emmanouil Saloustros, MD, a consultant medical oncologist at General Hospital of Heraklion “Venizelio” in Heraklion, Crete, Greece.

Dr Saloustros and his colleagues presented these findings at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 1438O_PR) and reported them in ESMO Open.

The researchers sent an online survey on the status of care and research in AYAs (ages 15-39) to members of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE).

The team received responses from 266 healthcare professionals across Europe—55% of them female. Eleven percent were age 20–29, 29% were age 30–39, 26% were age 40–49, 25% were age 50–59, and 9% were age 60 and older.

Forty-eight percent were medical oncologists, 21% were pediatric oncologists, 8% were in training, 5% were hematologists, 4% were radiation oncologists, and 2% were surgical oncologists. The rest were other types of healthcare professionals, such as oncology nurses.

Fifty-two percent of respondents worked in general academic centers, 19% in specialized cancer hospitals, and 11% in pediatric hospitals. Sixty percent of respondents had been trained to treat adults with cancer, 25% to treat pediatric cancer patients, and 15% were trained to treat both.

In the past year, 32% of respondents had treated between 1 and 10 AYAs, 28% had treated 11 to 20, 17% had treated between 21 and 50, and 16% had treated more than 50 AYAs.

Results

The following results are based on data from 242 survey respondents. (The other respondents did not provide complete information.)

More than two-thirds (67%) of the respondents said they did not have access to specialized services for AYAs with cancer. This was true for 88% of respondents in Southern Europe, 87% in Eastern Europe, 55% in Western Europe, and 40% in Northern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of hematologists said they had access to AYA services, as did 44% of pediatric oncologists and 27% of medical oncologists.

Eighty-six percent of respondents said their AYA patients had access to professional psychological support. This was true for 97% of respondents in Western Europe, 82% in Southern Europe, 81% in Northern Europe, and 74% in Eastern Europe.

Fifty-four percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to a support group with other young people. This was true for 81% of respondents in Northern Europe, 60% in Western Europe, 48% in Eastern Europe, and 34% in Southern Europe.

Thirty-six percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to an age-specific specialist nurse. This was true for 53% of respondents in Western Europe, 51% in Northern Europe, 32% in Eastern Europe, and 10% in Southern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of respondents said their institution provided AYAs with access to a fertility specialist. This was true for 78% of respondents in Western Europe, 72% in Northern Europe, 52% in Southern Europe, and 24% in Eastern Europe.

“These patients have specific needs that are not covered by pediatric or general oncology centers or classical medical oncology centers, and this survey shows that most do not have access to the recommended special care,” said Gilles Vassal, director of clinical research at Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France, and past president of SIOPE (who was not involved in this study).

“Countries without these services can look at existing examples—such as in the UK and France—to build teams equipped to improve survival and survivorship for adolescents and young adults with cancer.”

Photo by Rhoda Baer

MADRID—New research indicates there is a lack of specialized care in Europe for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer.

In a survey of more than 200 European healthcare professionals, more than two-thirds of respondents said they did not have access to specialized services where adult and pediatric cancer specialists work together to plan treatment and deliver care to AYAs with cancer.

This lack of services was more pronounced in Eastern and Southern Europe than Western and Northern Europe.

“The survey found gaps and disparities in cancer care for adolescents and young adults across Europe,” said study author Emmanouil Saloustros, MD, a consultant medical oncologist at General Hospital of Heraklion “Venizelio” in Heraklion, Crete, Greece.

Dr Saloustros and his colleagues presented these findings at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 1438O_PR) and reported them in ESMO Open.

The researchers sent an online survey on the status of care and research in AYAs (ages 15-39) to members of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE).

The team received responses from 266 healthcare professionals across Europe—55% of them female. Eleven percent were age 20–29, 29% were age 30–39, 26% were age 40–49, 25% were age 50–59, and 9% were age 60 and older.

Forty-eight percent were medical oncologists, 21% were pediatric oncologists, 8% were in training, 5% were hematologists, 4% were radiation oncologists, and 2% were surgical oncologists. The rest were other types of healthcare professionals, such as oncology nurses.

Fifty-two percent of respondents worked in general academic centers, 19% in specialized cancer hospitals, and 11% in pediatric hospitals. Sixty percent of respondents had been trained to treat adults with cancer, 25% to treat pediatric cancer patients, and 15% were trained to treat both.

In the past year, 32% of respondents had treated between 1 and 10 AYAs, 28% had treated 11 to 20, 17% had treated between 21 and 50, and 16% had treated more than 50 AYAs.

Results

The following results are based on data from 242 survey respondents. (The other respondents did not provide complete information.)

More than two-thirds (67%) of the respondents said they did not have access to specialized services for AYAs with cancer. This was true for 88% of respondents in Southern Europe, 87% in Eastern Europe, 55% in Western Europe, and 40% in Northern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of hematologists said they had access to AYA services, as did 44% of pediatric oncologists and 27% of medical oncologists.

Eighty-six percent of respondents said their AYA patients had access to professional psychological support. This was true for 97% of respondents in Western Europe, 82% in Southern Europe, 81% in Northern Europe, and 74% in Eastern Europe.

Fifty-four percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to a support group with other young people. This was true for 81% of respondents in Northern Europe, 60% in Western Europe, 48% in Eastern Europe, and 34% in Southern Europe.

Thirty-six percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to an age-specific specialist nurse. This was true for 53% of respondents in Western Europe, 51% in Northern Europe, 32% in Eastern Europe, and 10% in Southern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of respondents said their institution provided AYAs with access to a fertility specialist. This was true for 78% of respondents in Western Europe, 72% in Northern Europe, 52% in Southern Europe, and 24% in Eastern Europe.

“These patients have specific needs that are not covered by pediatric or general oncology centers or classical medical oncology centers, and this survey shows that most do not have access to the recommended special care,” said Gilles Vassal, director of clinical research at Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France, and past president of SIOPE (who was not involved in this study).

“Countries without these services can look at existing examples—such as in the UK and France—to build teams equipped to improve survival and survivorship for adolescents and young adults with cancer.”

Photo by Rhoda Baer

MADRID—New research indicates there is a lack of specialized care in Europe for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer.

In a survey of more than 200 European healthcare professionals, more than two-thirds of respondents said they did not have access to specialized services where adult and pediatric cancer specialists work together to plan treatment and deliver care to AYAs with cancer.

This lack of services was more pronounced in Eastern and Southern Europe than Western and Northern Europe.

“The survey found gaps and disparities in cancer care for adolescents and young adults across Europe,” said study author Emmanouil Saloustros, MD, a consultant medical oncologist at General Hospital of Heraklion “Venizelio” in Heraklion, Crete, Greece.

Dr Saloustros and his colleagues presented these findings at the ESMO 2017 Congress (abstract 1438O_PR) and reported them in ESMO Open.

The researchers sent an online survey on the status of care and research in AYAs (ages 15-39) to members of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE).

The team received responses from 266 healthcare professionals across Europe—55% of them female. Eleven percent were age 20–29, 29% were age 30–39, 26% were age 40–49, 25% were age 50–59, and 9% were age 60 and older.

Forty-eight percent were medical oncologists, 21% were pediatric oncologists, 8% were in training, 5% were hematologists, 4% were radiation oncologists, and 2% were surgical oncologists. The rest were other types of healthcare professionals, such as oncology nurses.

Fifty-two percent of respondents worked in general academic centers, 19% in specialized cancer hospitals, and 11% in pediatric hospitals. Sixty percent of respondents had been trained to treat adults with cancer, 25% to treat pediatric cancer patients, and 15% were trained to treat both.

In the past year, 32% of respondents had treated between 1 and 10 AYAs, 28% had treated 11 to 20, 17% had treated between 21 and 50, and 16% had treated more than 50 AYAs.

Results

The following results are based on data from 242 survey respondents. (The other respondents did not provide complete information.)

More than two-thirds (67%) of the respondents said they did not have access to specialized services for AYAs with cancer. This was true for 88% of respondents in Southern Europe, 87% in Eastern Europe, 55% in Western Europe, and 40% in Northern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of hematologists said they had access to AYA services, as did 44% of pediatric oncologists and 27% of medical oncologists.

Eighty-six percent of respondents said their AYA patients had access to professional psychological support. This was true for 97% of respondents in Western Europe, 82% in Southern Europe, 81% in Northern Europe, and 74% in Eastern Europe.

Fifty-four percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to a support group with other young people. This was true for 81% of respondents in Northern Europe, 60% in Western Europe, 48% in Eastern Europe, and 34% in Southern Europe.

Thirty-six percent of all respondents said their AYAs had access to an age-specific specialist nurse. This was true for 53% of respondents in Western Europe, 51% in Northern Europe, 32% in Eastern Europe, and 10% in Southern Europe.

Sixty-two percent of respondents said their institution provided AYAs with access to a fertility specialist. This was true for 78% of respondents in Western Europe, 72% in Northern Europe, 52% in Southern Europe, and 24% in Eastern Europe.

“These patients have specific needs that are not covered by pediatric or general oncology centers or classical medical oncology centers, and this survey shows that most do not have access to the recommended special care,” said Gilles Vassal, director of clinical research at Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France, and past president of SIOPE (who was not involved in this study).

“Countries without these services can look at existing examples—such as in the UK and France—to build teams equipped to improve survival and survivorship for adolescents and young adults with cancer.”

MADRID – The high rate of infusion-related reactions at first daratumumab infusion may be related to treatment duration, based on data from the CASTOR and POLLUX studies presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Infusion-related reactions occur in half of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients who receive daratumumab, but nearly all reactions are grade 2 or less and rarely lead to treatment discontinuation, reported Philippe Moreau, MD, of University Hospital, Nantes, France.

“In the two phase 3 trials, CASTOR and POLLUX, infusion-related reactions occurred in 45% and 48% of patients, respectively. Of these, 98% and 96%, respectively, occurred during the first infusion,” he said. Treatment duration was 7 hours for first infusion vs. 4 hours and 3 hours for the second and third infusions, respectively. Grade 3 infusion-related reactions occurred in 5.3% and 8.6% of patients in CASTOR and POLLUX, respectively. No grade 4 infusion-related reactions were observed in either trial.

(In CASTOR [NCT02136134], daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In POLLUX [NCT02076009], it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Based on improvements in progression-free survival relative to the background drugs alone, daratumumab was approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.)

All patients in the trials received some form of preinfusion medications. These included 650-1,000 mg of paracetamol by intravenous or oral administration, 25-50 mg of diphenhydramine, 10 mg of montelukast, and 20 mg of dexamethasone. Patients thought to be at high risk of respiratory complications were candidates for postinfusion medications such as diphenhydramine or a short-acting beta agonist. However, only about 10% of high-risk patients received these therapies, so the impact of this potentially preventive approach is not clear, Dr. Moreau said.

In grade 1 reactions, Dr. Moreau recommended that infusions be paused at the first sign of an infusion-related reaction and then restarted at half the infusion rate when the condition is considered stable. Daratumumab treatment should be withdrawn in grade 2 or higher infusion-related reactions associated with laryngeal edema or grade 2 or higher bronchospasm that does not respond to systemic therapy and resolves within 6 hours of onset.

In grade 3 infusion-related reactions, the recommendation is to stop the daratumumab infusion and closely observe the patient. The infusion should be restarted only if the severity drops to grade 1. Again, the rate of infusion after the interruption should be half the rate provided prior to the infusion-related reaction. Therapy should be withdrawn if the infusion-related reaction recurs for a second time, according to Dr. Moreau.

Infusion-related reactions involving the upper respiratory tract – such as dyspnea, cough, bronchospasm, or throat irritation – may be related to the physiologic function of CD38, Dr. Moreau said. For this reason, grade 3 upper respiratory-related events deserve close attention and persisting symptoms warrant halting treatment.

The evidence is “reassuring” that the majority of infusion-related reactions are confined to the first infusion, said the ESMO-invited discussant, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens. He noted that the specific treatment recommendations outlined by Dr. Moreau could be helpful for minimizing nuisance infusion-related reactions as well as reducing the risk of more serious infusion-related reactions, particularly those involving respiratory events.

Prophylactic strategies for infusion-related reactions are particularly important in patients with risk factors for respiratory complications, Dr. Terpos added.
 

op@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – The high rate of infusion-related reactions at first daratumumab infusion may be related to treatment duration, based on data from the CASTOR and POLLUX studies presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Infusion-related reactions occur in half of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients who receive daratumumab, but nearly all reactions are grade 2 or less and rarely lead to treatment discontinuation, reported Philippe Moreau, MD, of University Hospital, Nantes, France.

“In the two phase 3 trials, CASTOR and POLLUX, infusion-related reactions occurred in 45% and 48% of patients, respectively. Of these, 98% and 96%, respectively, occurred during the first infusion,” he said. Treatment duration was 7 hours for first infusion vs. 4 hours and 3 hours for the second and third infusions, respectively. Grade 3 infusion-related reactions occurred in 5.3% and 8.6% of patients in CASTOR and POLLUX, respectively. No grade 4 infusion-related reactions were observed in either trial.

(In CASTOR [NCT02136134], daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In POLLUX [NCT02076009], it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Based on improvements in progression-free survival relative to the background drugs alone, daratumumab was approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.)

All patients in the trials received some form of preinfusion medications. These included 650-1,000 mg of paracetamol by intravenous or oral administration, 25-50 mg of diphenhydramine, 10 mg of montelukast, and 20 mg of dexamethasone. Patients thought to be at high risk of respiratory complications were candidates for postinfusion medications such as diphenhydramine or a short-acting beta agonist. However, only about 10% of high-risk patients received these therapies, so the impact of this potentially preventive approach is not clear, Dr. Moreau said.

In grade 1 reactions, Dr. Moreau recommended that infusions be paused at the first sign of an infusion-related reaction and then restarted at half the infusion rate when the condition is considered stable. Daratumumab treatment should be withdrawn in grade 2 or higher infusion-related reactions associated with laryngeal edema or grade 2 or higher bronchospasm that does not respond to systemic therapy and resolves within 6 hours of onset.

In grade 3 infusion-related reactions, the recommendation is to stop the daratumumab infusion and closely observe the patient. The infusion should be restarted only if the severity drops to grade 1. Again, the rate of infusion after the interruption should be half the rate provided prior to the infusion-related reaction. Therapy should be withdrawn if the infusion-related reaction recurs for a second time, according to Dr. Moreau.

Infusion-related reactions involving the upper respiratory tract – such as dyspnea, cough, bronchospasm, or throat irritation – may be related to the physiologic function of CD38, Dr. Moreau said. For this reason, grade 3 upper respiratory-related events deserve close attention and persisting symptoms warrant halting treatment.

The evidence is “reassuring” that the majority of infusion-related reactions are confined to the first infusion, said the ESMO-invited discussant, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens. He noted that the specific treatment recommendations outlined by Dr. Moreau could be helpful for minimizing nuisance infusion-related reactions as well as reducing the risk of more serious infusion-related reactions, particularly those involving respiratory events.

Prophylactic strategies for infusion-related reactions are particularly important in patients with risk factors for respiratory complications, Dr. Terpos added.
 

op@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – The high rate of infusion-related reactions at first daratumumab infusion may be related to treatment duration, based on data from the CASTOR and POLLUX studies presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.

Infusion-related reactions occur in half of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients who receive daratumumab, but nearly all reactions are grade 2 or less and rarely lead to treatment discontinuation, reported Philippe Moreau, MD, of University Hospital, Nantes, France.

“In the two phase 3 trials, CASTOR and POLLUX, infusion-related reactions occurred in 45% and 48% of patients, respectively. Of these, 98% and 96%, respectively, occurred during the first infusion,” he said. Treatment duration was 7 hours for first infusion vs. 4 hours and 3 hours for the second and third infusions, respectively. Grade 3 infusion-related reactions occurred in 5.3% and 8.6% of patients in CASTOR and POLLUX, respectively. No grade 4 infusion-related reactions were observed in either trial.

(In CASTOR [NCT02136134], daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In POLLUX [NCT02076009], it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Based on improvements in progression-free survival relative to the background drugs alone, daratumumab was approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.)

All patients in the trials received some form of preinfusion medications. These included 650-1,000 mg of paracetamol by intravenous or oral administration, 25-50 mg of diphenhydramine, 10 mg of montelukast, and 20 mg of dexamethasone. Patients thought to be at high risk of respiratory complications were candidates for postinfusion medications such as diphenhydramine or a short-acting beta agonist. However, only about 10% of high-risk patients received these therapies, so the impact of this potentially preventive approach is not clear, Dr. Moreau said.

In grade 1 reactions, Dr. Moreau recommended that infusions be paused at the first sign of an infusion-related reaction and then restarted at half the infusion rate when the condition is considered stable. Daratumumab treatment should be withdrawn in grade 2 or higher infusion-related reactions associated with laryngeal edema or grade 2 or higher bronchospasm that does not respond to systemic therapy and resolves within 6 hours of onset.

In grade 3 infusion-related reactions, the recommendation is to stop the daratumumab infusion and closely observe the patient. The infusion should be restarted only if the severity drops to grade 1. Again, the rate of infusion after the interruption should be half the rate provided prior to the infusion-related reaction. Therapy should be withdrawn if the infusion-related reaction recurs for a second time, according to Dr. Moreau.

Infusion-related reactions involving the upper respiratory tract – such as dyspnea, cough, bronchospasm, or throat irritation – may be related to the physiologic function of CD38, Dr. Moreau said. For this reason, grade 3 upper respiratory-related events deserve close attention and persisting symptoms warrant halting treatment.

The evidence is “reassuring” that the majority of infusion-related reactions are confined to the first infusion, said the ESMO-invited discussant, Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, of the University of Athens. He noted that the specific treatment recommendations outlined by Dr. Moreau could be helpful for minimizing nuisance infusion-related reactions as well as reducing the risk of more serious infusion-related reactions, particularly those involving respiratory events.

Prophylactic strategies for infusion-related reactions are particularly important in patients with risk factors for respiratory complications, Dr. Terpos added.
 

op@frontlinemedcom.com

MADRID – The biosimilar GP2013 met the criteria for therapeutic equivalence to rituximab in a large comparator trial of previously untreated patients with aggressive follicular lymphoma.

Based on results presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, “there is absolutely no difference in the objective response rates for GP2013 and rituximab,” the primary endpoint of the trial, reported Wojciech Jurczak, MD, PhD, head of lymphoma, department of hematology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.

Dr. Jurczak characterized the double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial ASSIST_FL (NCT01419665) as the “largest biosimilar trial in hematology.” For the study, 629 patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma were randomized to GP2013 and the conventional regimen of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (G-CVP) or rituximab and the same three-agent regimen (R-CVP). Each regimen was given for eight cycles followed by maintenance monotherapy with the assigned monoclonal antibody for up to 2 years.

The primary endpoint, objective response rate (ORR), was 87.1% and 87.5% for G-CVP and R-CVP, respectively. There were no differences in ORR among the subgroups evaluated, which included patients aged 60 years and older vs. younger patients, presence or absence of bulky disease, high or low FLIPI (Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index) score, gender, and the geographic region where treatment was given.

Safety was a secondary endpoint evaluated at the end of eight cycles and again after a year of maintenance therapy. The proportion of patients with any adverse event and the proportion with grade 3 or greater adverse events were not statistically different at any time point. There were also no significant differences in any of the other secondary endpoints evaluated, which included pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and immune measures.

The results are consistent with those of a related randomized bioequivalence trial comparing GP2013 and rituximab in 312 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1598-1602). The primary endpoint in that trial was area-under-the-curve serum concentration time.

The two studies are mutually reinforcing, and “the ASSIST_FL trial ends the story. We have the totality of evidence that GP2013 can be considered a biosimilar,” said Dr. Jurczak, who anticipates “major price differences” for this agent relative to rituximab.

“We may, based on the results of the follicular lymphoma trial, use the biosimilar in all registered indications for rituximab,” said Dr. Jurczak. This is also the conclusion of the European Medicine Agency, which approved this agent in June 2017 for all rituximab indications.

In explaining the process for approval of biosimilars, Dr. Jurczak emphasized that demonstrating bioequivalence is not the same as the approval process for a new therapeutic agent, for which regulatory agents require a demonstration of efficacy on a meaningful clinical endpoint, such as progression-free survival. For biosimilars, it is not necessary to show clinical benefits. Biosimilars must demonstrate the same biological activity, and ORR is considered an acceptable measure.

The ESMO-invited discussant, Michele Ghielmini, MD, PhD, medical director at the Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, agreed. “We can reasonably speculate that (when rituximab and the biosimilar are associated with the same) response rate, they will lead to the same clinical benefits.”

MADRID – The biosimilar GP2013 met the criteria for therapeutic equivalence to rituximab in a large comparator trial of previously untreated patients with aggressive follicular lymphoma.

Based on results presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, “there is absolutely no difference in the objective response rates for GP2013 and rituximab,” the primary endpoint of the trial, reported Wojciech Jurczak, MD, PhD, head of lymphoma, department of hematology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.

Dr. Jurczak characterized the double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial ASSIST_FL (NCT01419665) as the “largest biosimilar trial in hematology.” For the study, 629 patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma were randomized to GP2013 and the conventional regimen of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (G-CVP) or rituximab and the same three-agent regimen (R-CVP). Each regimen was given for eight cycles followed by maintenance monotherapy with the assigned monoclonal antibody for up to 2 years.

The primary endpoint, objective response rate (ORR), was 87.1% and 87.5% for G-CVP and R-CVP, respectively. There were no differences in ORR among the subgroups evaluated, which included patients aged 60 years and older vs. younger patients, presence or absence of bulky disease, high or low FLIPI (Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index) score, gender, and the geographic region where treatment was given.

Safety was a secondary endpoint evaluated at the end of eight cycles and again after a year of maintenance therapy. The proportion of patients with any adverse event and the proportion with grade 3 or greater adverse events were not statistically different at any time point. There were also no significant differences in any of the other secondary endpoints evaluated, which included pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and immune measures.

The results are consistent with those of a related randomized bioequivalence trial comparing GP2013 and rituximab in 312 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1598-1602). The primary endpoint in that trial was area-under-the-curve serum concentration time.

The two studies are mutually reinforcing, and “the ASSIST_FL trial ends the story. We have the totality of evidence that GP2013 can be considered a biosimilar,” said Dr. Jurczak, who anticipates “major price differences” for this agent relative to rituximab.

“We may, based on the results of the follicular lymphoma trial, use the biosimilar in all registered indications for rituximab,” said Dr. Jurczak. This is also the conclusion of the European Medicine Agency, which approved this agent in June 2017 for all rituximab indications.

In explaining the process for approval of biosimilars, Dr. Jurczak emphasized that demonstrating bioequivalence is not the same as the approval process for a new therapeutic agent, for which regulatory agents require a demonstration of efficacy on a meaningful clinical endpoint, such as progression-free survival. For biosimilars, it is not necessary to show clinical benefits. Biosimilars must demonstrate the same biological activity, and ORR is considered an acceptable measure.

The ESMO-invited discussant, Michele Ghielmini, MD, PhD, medical director at the Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, agreed. “We can reasonably speculate that (when rituximab and the biosimilar are associated with the same) response rate, they will lead to the same clinical benefits.”

MADRID – The biosimilar GP2013 met the criteria for therapeutic equivalence to rituximab in a large comparator trial of previously untreated patients with aggressive follicular lymphoma.

Based on results presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, “there is absolutely no difference in the objective response rates for GP2013 and rituximab,” the primary endpoint of the trial, reported Wojciech Jurczak, MD, PhD, head of lymphoma, department of hematology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.

Dr. Jurczak characterized the double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial ASSIST_FL (NCT01419665) as the “largest biosimilar trial in hematology.” For the study, 629 patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma were randomized to GP2013 and the conventional regimen of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (G-CVP) or rituximab and the same three-agent regimen (R-CVP). Each regimen was given for eight cycles followed by maintenance monotherapy with the assigned monoclonal antibody for up to 2 years.

The primary endpoint, objective response rate (ORR), was 87.1% and 87.5% for G-CVP and R-CVP, respectively. There were no differences in ORR among the subgroups evaluated, which included patients aged 60 years and older vs. younger patients, presence or absence of bulky disease, high or low FLIPI (Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index) score, gender, and the geographic region where treatment was given.

Safety was a secondary endpoint evaluated at the end of eight cycles and again after a year of maintenance therapy. The proportion of patients with any adverse event and the proportion with grade 3 or greater adverse events were not statistically different at any time point. There were also no significant differences in any of the other secondary endpoints evaluated, which included pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and immune measures.

The results are consistent with those of a related randomized bioequivalence trial comparing GP2013 and rituximab in 312 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1598-1602). The primary endpoint in that trial was area-under-the-curve serum concentration time.

The two studies are mutually reinforcing, and “the ASSIST_FL trial ends the story. We have the totality of evidence that GP2013 can be considered a biosimilar,” said Dr. Jurczak, who anticipates “major price differences” for this agent relative to rituximab.

“We may, based on the results of the follicular lymphoma trial, use the biosimilar in all registered indications for rituximab,” said Dr. Jurczak. This is also the conclusion of the European Medicine Agency, which approved this agent in June 2017 for all rituximab indications.

In explaining the process for approval of biosimilars, Dr. Jurczak emphasized that demonstrating bioequivalence is not the same as the approval process for a new therapeutic agent, for which regulatory agents require a demonstration of efficacy on a meaningful clinical endpoint, such as progression-free survival. For biosimilars, it is not necessary to show clinical benefits. Biosimilars must demonstrate the same biological activity, and ORR is considered an acceptable measure.

The ESMO-invited discussant, Michele Ghielmini, MD, PhD, medical director at the Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, agreed. “We can reasonably speculate that (when rituximab and the biosimilar are associated with the same) response rate, they will lead to the same clinical benefits.”

MADRID – A combination of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (Tafinlar) and the MEK inhibitor trametinib (Mekinist) delivered in the adjuvant setting was associated with a halving of the risk for relapse compared with placebo among patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations, late-breaking results from a phase 3 trial show.

Among 438 patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutated melanoma randomly assigned after complete surgical resection to dabrafenib/trametinib in the COMBI-AD trial, the estimated rate of 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was 58%, compared with 39% for 432 patients assigned to double placebos. This difference translated into a hazard ratio for relapse with the dabrafenib/trametinib combination of 0.47 (P less than .001).

MADRID – A combination of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (Tafinlar) and the MEK inhibitor trametinib (Mekinist) delivered in the adjuvant setting was associated with a halving of the risk for relapse compared with placebo among patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations, late-breaking results from a phase 3 trial show.

Among 438 patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutated melanoma randomly assigned after complete surgical resection to dabrafenib/trametinib in the COMBI-AD trial, the estimated rate of 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was 58%, compared with 39% for 432 patients assigned to double placebos. This difference translated into a hazard ratio for relapse with the dabrafenib/trametinib combination of 0.47 (P less than .001).

MADRID – A combination of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (Tafinlar) and the MEK inhibitor trametinib (Mekinist) delivered in the adjuvant setting was associated with a halving of the risk for relapse compared with placebo among patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations, late-breaking results from a phase 3 trial show.

Among 438 patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutated melanoma randomly assigned after complete surgical resection to dabrafenib/trametinib in the COMBI-AD trial, the estimated rate of 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was 58%, compared with 39% for 432 patients assigned to double placebos. This difference translated into a hazard ratio for relapse with the dabrafenib/trametinib combination of 0.47 (P less than .001).