ASCO_2010_files/Kang AVAGAST ASCO 2010

Download Report

Transcript ASCO_2010_files/Kang AVAGAST ASCO 2010

AVAGAST: a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled, phase III study of first-line capecitabine and cisplatin + bevacizumab or placebo in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) Y-K Kang, A Ohtsu, E Van Cutsem, SY Rha, A Sawaki SR Park, H-Y Lim, J Wu, B Langer, MA Shah on behalf of AVAGAST investigators

Rationale for Bevacizumab in AGC

Angiogenesis important for tumor growth, progression and metastases

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF):

Critical growth factor for tumor angiogenesis

Over-expressed and prognostic for many human tumors

Bevacizumab:

Humanized monoclonal antibody to VEGF

– –

Effective and safe in mCRC and other tumor types Promising results in Phase II studies in AGC 1 1 Shah et al. J Clin Oncol 2006;23:2574 –2576

AVAGAST:

A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo- Controlled Phase III Study Capecitabine*/Cisplatin (XP) + Placebo q3w Locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer R Capecitabine*/Cisplatin (XP) + Bevacizumab q3w Stratification factors: 1. Geographic region 2. Fluoropirimidine backbone 3. Disease status *5-FU also allowed if cape contraindicated Cape 1000 mg/m 2 oral bid, d1 –14, 1-week rest Cisplatin 80 mg/m 2 d1 Bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg d1 Maximum of 6 cycles of cisplatin Cape and bevacizumab/placebo until PD Starting dose of bev/placebo: 30 minutes, subsequent doses: 15 minutes

Endpoints and Statistical Assumptions

Primary: overall survival

Secondary: PFS, TTP, ORR, duration of response, safety, QoL, biomarkers

Statistical assumptions

Median overall survival improvement from 10.0 to 12.8 months (HR 0.78)

Two sided α-level = 0.05, 80% power

Required sample size: 760 patients for 517 deaths (with interim analysis)

Main Eligibility Criteria

• • • • • • •

Metastatic or inoperable, locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) Measurable or evaluable disease ECOG performance status 0 gastric cancer –2 No previous chemotherapy for metastatic/locally advanced If adjuvant chemotherapy, completed at least 6 months prior to randomization No previous platinum or antiangiogenic therapy No history of other malignancies

Trial Conduct

From September 2007 to December 2008, 774 patients were enrolled

A total of 93 centers in 17 countries were involved

Interim analysis

Planned at 345 events, but not performed according to protocol as analysis date too close to anticipated final analysis

Data cutoff for final analysis

November 2009

After 509 events

Patient Characteristics (I)

Number of patients N=774 (%) Gender Male Age, years Median (range) XP + Placebo N=387 258 (67) 59 (22 –82) ECOG PS 0 –1 ≥2 367 (95) 20 (5) Region Fluoropyrimidine Asia Europe Pan-America Capecitabine 5-FU 188 (49) 124 (32) 75 (19) 365 (94) 22 (6) Disease status Locally advanced Metastatic 9 (2) 378 (98) XP + Bev N=387 257 (66) 58 (22 –81) 365 (94) 22 * (6) 188 (49) 125 (32) 74 (19) 364 (94) 23 (6) 20 (5) 367 (95) *1 additional patient had an ECOG PS of 4

Patient Characteristics (II)

Number of patients N=774 (%) Primary site Stomach GEJ Histologic type Intestinal Diffuse Mixed XP + Placebo N=387 338 (87) 49 (13) 135 (35) 206 (53) 26 (7) Disease measurability Metastatic sites, n Prior gastrectomy Liver metastasis Measurable Evaluable 0 1 ≥2 Yes Yes 297 (77) 90 (23) 8 (2) 131 (34) 247 (64) 107 (28) 126 (33) XP + Bev N=387 333 (86) 54 (14) 155 (40) 176 (46) 35 (9) 311 (80) 76 (20) 8 (2) 131 (34) 247 (64) 110 (28) 130 (34)

Overall Survival

Survival rate 1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

0 Number at risk XP + Placebo XP + Bev 387 387 3 343 355 6 271 291 10.1

12.1

9 204 232 12 Study month 146 178 15 98 104 XP + Placebo XP + Bev HR = 0.87

95% CI 0.73

–1.03 p = 0.1002

18 54 50 21 15 19 24 0 0

Progression-Free Survival

Progression-free survival rate 1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

6.7

0.5

0.4

0.3

5.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

Number at risk 0 XP + Placebo XP + Bev 387 387 3 279 306 6 145 201 9 86 123 12 Study month 55 71 15 32 38 XP + Placebo XP + Bev HR = 0.80

95% CI 0.68

–0.93 p = 0.0037

18 15 11 21 3 3 24 0 0

Best Overall Response:

Measurable Disease Population XP + Placebo N=387 XP + Bev N=387 Patients with measurable disease Overall response 95% CI Difference 95% CI P value (

2 ) Complete response Partial response Stable disease Progressive disease Not assessable 297 0.0315

311 111 (37%) 31.9

–43.1

9% 0.6

–16.6

143 (46%) 40.3

–51.7

3 (1%) 108 (36%) 90 (30%) 63 (21%) 33 (11%) 5 (2%) 138 (44%) 93 (30%) 44 (14%) 31 (10%)

Overall Survival: Subgroup Analysis

Category All Subgroup All Region Asia Europe Pan-America ECOG performance Site of primary disease Histologic type 0

1 Stomach GE junction Intestinal Diffuse Mixed Disease status Disease measurability Prior gastrectomy No. of metastatic sites at baseline Locally advanced* Metastatic Measurable Non-measurable Yes No

1

2 0 1 Hazard Ratio 2 * 29 patients with locally advanced disease only

Regional Differences in Efficacy

OS Region Asia Europe America PFS Asia Europe America XP + Placebo Median, mo XP + Bev Median, mo 12.1

13.9

8.6

6.8

5.6

4.4

4.4

11.1

11.5

6.7

6.9

5.9

Delta, mo Hazard Ratio 1.8

0.97

95% CI 0.75

–1.25

2.5

4.7

1.1

0.85

0.63

0.92

0.63

–1.14

0.43

–0.94

0.74

–1.14

2.5

1.5

0.71

0.65

0.54

–0.93

0.46

–0.93

Patient Characteristics by Region

% of patients Age ECOG PS Primary site Extent of disease Prior gastrectomy Measurable lesion Liver metastasis yes no yes no yes no <65 ≥65 0 –1 2 Stomach GEJ Metastatic Locally advanced 32 68 73 27 27 73 Asia 72 28 97 3* 94 6 99 1 Europe 68 32 91 9 78 22 95 5 23 77 88 12 37 63 Pan-America 77 23 96 4 84 16 92 8 27 73 77 23 42 58 *1 additional patient had an ECOG PS of 4

Second-Line Therapy by Region

Region Asia Europe Pan-America Patients entered Patients receiving second-line treatment 376 249 149 248 78 32 % 66 31 21

Most Frequent Grade 3 –5 AEs (≥5%)

% of patients Neutropenia Febrile neutropenia Anemia Decreased appetite Nausea Vomiting Diarrhea Hypokalemia Asthenia Hand-foot syndrome Hypertension Pulmonary embolism Fatigue XP + Placebo N=381 37 4 14 11 10 9 4 6 6 3 <1 5 4 XP + Bev N=386 35 5 10 8 7 6 3 5 6 8 3 5 6

AEs of Special Interest to Bevacizumab

% of patients XP + Placebo (N=381) XP + Bev (N=386) Total G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 Total G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 Patients with ≥1 AE (all body systems) VTEs ATEs 39 12 2 19 <1 <1 14 2 – 9 6 1 4 3 1 2 <1 – 50 10 2 30 <1 <1 17 3 <1 17 4 <1 3 3 <1 1 – – Bleeding Hypertension Proteinuria Wound complications GI perforations CHF 15 13 6 <1 <1 <1 11 6 2 <1 – – 2 7 3 <1 <1 – 3 <1 – – – <1 <1 – – – – – <1 – – – <1 – 26 21 7 2 2 <1 21 7 3 <1 – – 2 9 4 <1 – <1 3 6 <1 <1 2 <1 <1 – – – – – <1 – – – <1 <1 Fistula/abscess in 2 patients on XP + Bev Reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome in 2 patients on XP + Bev

AVAGAST Summary & Conclusions

• • • • •

Primary endpoint of OS not met Secondary efficacy endpoints (PFS, best ORR) significantly improved, indicating clinical activity of bev + chemo in AGC Heterogeneous efficacy results in both treatment arms across geographic regions

Hypothesis generating with regard to tumor burden, patient status, practice patterns, genetics?

No unexpected / new safety signals for bev Further analysis ongoing, including preplanned biomarker analysis

Acknowledgments

Patients and their families

Investigators, study coordinators and nurses at 93 centers in 17 countries

AVAGAST study team at Genentech, Roche & Chugai