O-15 Randomized, phase 3 study of second-line tislelizumab vs chemotherapy in advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE 302) in the overall population and Europe/North America subgroup

Background: The global Phase 3 study RATIONALE 302 (NCT03430843) evaluated the efficacy and safety of second-line tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Here, we report data from the overall and Europe/North America (EU/NA) populations. Methods: Eligible adult patients had disease progression during or after first-line systemic therapy, ≥1 evaluable lesion per RECIST v1.1 and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (ECOG PS) of ≤1. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously Q3W or investigator-chosen chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan) and treated until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal. Stratification factors included chemotherapy option, region, and ECOG PS. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in all patients (ITT population). The key secondary endpoint was OS in PD-L1 positive (vCPS ≥10%) patients; other secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), health-related quality of life and safety. Results: 512 patients (overall population) were randomized to tislelizumab (n=256) or chemotherapy (n=256), of which 108 (21%) patients were enrolled into EU/NA subgroup (n=55 tislelizumab, n=53 chemotherapy). On 1 December 2020 (data cut-off), median follow-up was 6.9 and 6.8 months in the overall population and EU/NA subgroup, respectively. Tislelizumab improved OS vs chemotherapy in the overall population (median OS 8.6 vs 6.3 months; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57–0.85; p=0.0001); survival benefit was consistently observed in the EU/NA subgroup (median OS 11.2 vs 6.3 months; HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35–0.87). Treatment with tislelizumab was associated with improved ORR (20.3% [95% CI 15.6%–25.8%] vs 9.8% [95% CI 6.4%–14.1%]) and median DoR (7.1 vs 4.0 months; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23–0.75) vs chemotherapy in the overall population. Improvement in ORR (20.0% [95% CI 10.4%–33.0%] vs 11.3% [95% CI 4.3%–23.0%]) and median DOR (5.1 vs 2.1 months; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.13–1.39) was also observed in the EU/NA subgroup. Fewer patients had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy in both the overall and EU/NA populations (46% vs 68% and 56% vs 71%, respectively). Of these, fewer Grade ≥3 AEs were treatment-related with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy (overall: 19% vs 56%; EU/NA: 13% vs 51%). AEs leading to death were similar with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy (overall: 14% vs 12%; EU/NA: 6% vs 5%). Conclusions: Second-line tislelizumab demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC. Tislelizumab demonstrated a tolerable safety profile. Efficacy and safety results from the EU/NA subgroup were consistent with the overall population. Clinical trial identification: NCT03430843

Real-World Data About Treatment Pattern and Outcomes of Patients With Unresectable Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in France: Results From the Fregat Database

International audienceEsophageal cancer is the seventh most common cancer and sixth leading cause of cancer death, worldwide, with approximately 600,000 new cases and over 540,000 deaths in 2020. Squamous-cell carcinoma accounts for approximately 60% of cases in Europe. The study aim was to describe real-world treatment and outcomes of French patients presenting with UnResectable Advanced, or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous-Cell Carcinoma (URAM-ESCC) from 2014 to 2019 before approval of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)

O-15 Randomized, phase 3 study of second-line tislelizumab vs chemotherapy in advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE 302) in the overall population and Europe/North America subgroup

Background The global Phase 3 study RATIONALE 302 (NCT03430843) evaluated the efficacy and safety of second-line tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Here, we report data from the overall and Europe/North America (EU/NA) populations. Methods Eligible adult patients had disease progression during or after first-line systemic therapy, ≥1 evaluable lesion per RECIST v1.1 and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (ECOG PS) of ≤1. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously Q3W or investigator-chosen chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan) and treated until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal. Stratification factors included chemotherapy option, region, and ECOG PS. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in all patients (ITT population). The key secondary endpoint was OS in PD-L1 positive (vCPS ≥10%) patients; other secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), health-related quality of life and safety. Results 512 patients (overall population) were randomized to tislelizumab (n=256) or chemotherapy (n=256), of which 108 (21%) patients were enrolled into EU/NA subgroup (n=55 tislelizumab, n=53 chemotherapy). On 1 December 2020 (data cut-off), median follow-up was 6.9 and 6.8 months in the overall population and EU/NA subgroup, respectively. Tislelizumab improved OS vs chemotherapy in the overall population (median OS 8.6 vs 6.3 months; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57–0.85; p=0.0001); survival benefit was consistently observed in the EU/NA subgroup (median OS 11.2 vs 6.3 months; HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35–0.87). Treatment with tislelizumab was associated with improved ORR (20.3% [95% CI 15.6%–25.8%] vs 9.8% [95% CI 6.4%–14.1%]) and median DoR (7.1 vs 4.0 months; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23–0.75) vs chemotherapy in the overall population. Improvement in ORR (20.0% [95% CI 10.4%–33.0%] vs 11.3% [95% CI 4.3%–23.0%]) and median DOR (5.1 vs 2.1 months; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.13–1.39) was also observed in the EU/NA subgroup. Fewer patients had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy in both the overall and EU/NA populations (46% vs 68% and 56% vs 71%, respectively). Of these, fewer Grade ≥3 AEs were treatment-related with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy (overall: 19% vs 56%; EU/NA: 13% vs 51%). AEs leading to death were similar with tislelizumab vs chemotherapy (overall: 14% vs 12%; EU/NA: 6% vs 5%). Conclusions Second-line tislelizumab demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC. Tislelizumab demonstrated a tolerable safety profile. Efficacy and safety results from the EU/NA subgroup were consistent with the overall population. Clinical trial identification NCT03430843

Prognostic factor analysis for elderly patients treated for metastatic colorectal cancer in the randomized phase II trial PRODIGE 20

International audienc

Bevacizumab+chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in elderly patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial-PRODIGE 20 study results

IF 11.855International audienceBackground :Metastatic colorectal cancer frequently occurs in elderly patients. Bevacizumab in combination with front line chemotherapy (CT) is a standard treatment but some concern raised about tolerance of bevacizumab for these patients. The purpose of PRODIGE 20 was to evaluate tolerance and efficacy of bevacizumab according to specific end points in this population.Patients and methods :Patients aged 75 years and over were randomly assigned to bevacizumab + CT (BEV) versus CT. LV5FU2, FOLFOX and FOLFIRI regimen were prescribed according to investigator’s choice. The composite co-primary end point, assessed 4 months after randomization, was based on efficacy (tumor control and absence of decrease of the Spitzer QoL index) and safety (absence of severe cardiovascular toxicities and unexpected hospitalization). For each arm, the treatment will be consider as inefficient if 20% or less of the patients met the efficacy criteria and not safe if 40% or less met the safety criteria.Results :About 102 patients were randomized (51 BEV and 51 CT), median age was 80 years (range 75–91). Primary end point was met for efficacy in 50% and 58% and for safety in 61% and 71% of patients in BEV and CT, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 9.7 months in BEV and 7.8 months in CT. Median overall survival was 21.7 months in BEV and 19.8 months in CT. The 36-month overall survival rate was 27% in BEV and 10.1% in CT. Severe toxicities grade 3/4 were mainly non-hematologic toxicities (80.4% in BEV, 63.3% in CT).Conclusion :Bevacizumab combined with CT was safe and efficient. Both arms met the primary safety and efficacy criteria

Continuation versus discontinuation of first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic squamous cell oesophageal cancer: A randomised phase II trial (E-DIS)

International audiencePURPOSE:The role of chemotherapy has not been established in the treatment of metastatic squamous cell oesophageal cancer (mESCC).PATIENTS AND METHODS:E-DIS is a discontinuation trial, aimed at estimating efficacy, quality of life and safety of chemotherapy continuation (CT-CONT) in patients with mESCC who are free from progression after a selection phase of chemotherapy. The primary end-point was overall survival.RESULTS:Sixty-seven patients were randomised. The 9-month survival rate was 50% (85% confidence interval [CI]: 37-62%) and 48% (85% CI: 35-60%) in the CT-CONT arm and in the chemotherapy discontinuation (CT-DISC) arm, respectively. The time until definitive deterioration of the global health status (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] core quality of life questionnaire) was 6.6 months (95% CI: 3.3-12.4) for the CT-CONT arm and 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.9-6.3) for the CT-DISC arm, with a hazard ratio (HRCT-DISC/CT-CONT) = 1.44 (95% CI: 0.82-2.53). We observed a beneficial trend in favour of CT-CONT (HR > 1) for most dimensions, including an improvement for three dimensions (dysphagia, eating and oesophageal pain) of the EORTC Oesophageal Cancer Module QLQ-OES18.CONCLUSION:CT-CONT provides an overall survival rate that is similar to CT-DISC. E-DIS trial provides valuable data to support shared decision-making between physicians and patients regarding CT-CONT/DISC

Nivolumab Combination Therapy in Advanced Esophageal Squamous-Cell Carcinoma.

BackgroundFirst-line chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma results in poor outcomes. The monoclonal antibody nivolumab has shown an overall survival benefit over chemotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma.MethodsIn this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus the monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor-cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of 1% or greater and then in the overall population (all randomly assigned patients).ResultsA total of 970 patients underwent randomization. At a 13-month minimum follow-up, overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone, both among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 15.4 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.54; 99.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.80; PConclusionsBoth first-line treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma, with no new safety signals identified. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 648 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03143153.)

Geriatric analysis from PRODIGE 20 randomized phase II trial evaluating bevacizumab + chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in older patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer

IF 7.191 (2017)International audienceBackgroundOlder patients have frailty characteristics that impair the transposition of treatment results found in younger patients. Predictive factors are needed to help with treatment choices for older patients. The PRODIGE 20 study is a randomized phase II study that evaluated chemotherapy associated with bevacizumab (BEV) or not (CT) in patients aged 75 years or older.Patients and methodsPatients underwent a geriatric assessment at randomization and at each evaluation. The predictive value of geriatric and oncologic factors was determined for the primary composite end-point assessing safety and efficacy of treatment (BEV or CT) simultaneously and also progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).Results102 patients were randomized (51 BEV and 51 CT; median age 80 years [range 75–91]). On multivariate analysis, baseline normal independent activity of daily living (IADL) score and no previous cardiovascular disease predicted the primary end-point. High (versus low) baseline Köhne score predicted short PFS and baseline Spitzer quality of life (QoL) score 2 LN levels above normal and high baseline Köhne score predicted short OS. Survival without deteriorated QoL and autonomy was similar with BEV and CT. On subgroup analyses, the benefit of bevacizumab seemed to be maintained in patients with baseline impaired IADL or nutritional status.ConclusionNormal IADL score was associated with a good efficacy and safety of both BEV and CT. Köhne criteria may be relevant prognostic factors in older patients. Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy does not impair patient autonomy or QoL