ASCO_2013_files/Von Hoff MPACT oral ASCO 2013

download report

Transcript ASCO_2013_files/Von Hoff MPACT oral ASCO 2013

Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial (MPACT) of Weekly nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine vs Gemcitabine Alone for Patients With Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas With PET and CA19-9 Correlates

Daniel D. Von Hoff, 1 Malcolm Moore, 6 Thomas Ervin, Thomas Seay, 7 2 Francis P. Arena, 3 Sergey A. Tjulandin, 8 E. Gabriela Chiorean, WenWee Ma, 9 4 Jeffrey Infante, 5 Mansoor N. Saleh, 10 Marion Harris, 11 Michele Reni, Cutsem, 15 12 Ramesh K. Ramanathan, 1 David Goldstein, 16 Xinyu Wei, 17 Josep Tabernero, Jose Iglesias, 18 13 Manuel Hidalgo, 14 Markus F. Renschler 17 Eric Van 1 TGen, Scottsdale Healthcare, AZ, USA; 2 Florida Cancer Specialists/Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Englewood, FL; 3 Arena Oncology Associates, Lake Success, NY, USA; 4 University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 5 Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, PLLC, Nashville, TN; 6 Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada; 7 Atlanta Cancer Care, GA, USA; 8 Blokhin Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia; 9 Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA; 10 Cancer Specialists, Atlanta, GA, USA; 11 Southern Health, East Bentleigh, VIC, Australia; 12 San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; 13 Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; 14 Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, Madrid, Spain; 15 Leuven University, Belgium; 16 Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 17 Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA; 18 Bionomics, Thebarton, Australia

Disclosures

This study was sponsored by Celgene Corporation Von Hoff: consultant or advisory role, honoraria, and research funding, Celgene; Ervin: research funding, Celgene; Arena : research funding, Clinical Research Alliance and Celgene; Chiorean : research funding, Celgene; Moore : consultant or advisory role and research funding, Celgene; Seay: research funding, Celgene; Tjulandin: research funding, Celgene; Ma: research funding, Celgene; Saleh: research funding, Celgene; Reni : consultant or advisory role, honoraria, and research funding, Celgene; Ramanathan : consultant or advisory role, honoraria, and research funding, Celgene; Tabernero : consultant or advisory role and honoraria, Celgene; Hidalgo: consultant or advisory role, honoraria, and research funding, Celgene; Van Cutsem : research funding, Celgene; Goldstein: consultant or advisory role and research funding, Celgene; Wei: employment or leadership position and stock ownership, Celgene; Renschler: ownership, Celgene; Infante, Harris : Iglesias : employment or leadership position at Bionomics and stock ownership, Celgene; employment or leadership position and stock nothing to disclose.

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

2

nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine

in Pancreatic Cancer

1. Preclinical models 1,2 :

• •

nab-Paclitaxel (nab-P) active as single agent Synergizes with gemcitabine (Gem) 2. In a 67-patient phase I/II trial of nab-P + Gem 1

MTD: nab-P 125 mg/m 2 + Gem 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1, 8, and

15 every 28 days Promising activity at MTD

ORR: 48%

Median PFS: 7.9 months

Median OS: 12.2 months

1.

2.

Von Hoff DD, et al.

J Clin Oncol

. 2011;29:4548-4554. Frese KK, et al.

Cancer Discov

. 2012;2:260-269. Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

3

Planned N = 842

• • • • • •

Stage IV No prior treatment for metastatic disease KPS ≥ 70 Measurable disease Total bilirubin ≤ ULN No age limitation

  

Primary endpoint

OS Secondary endpoints

PFS and ORR by independent review (RECIST) Safety and tolerability

By NCI CTCAE v3.0

Study Design

nab-P 125 mg/m 2 IV qw 3/4 + Gem 1000 mg/m 2 IV qw 3/4 1:1, stratified by KPS, region, liver metastasis

• • • • •

Gem 1000 mg/m 2 IV qw 7/8 then qw 3/4 With 608 events, 90% power to detect OS; HR = 0.769 (2-sided α = 0.049) Treat until progression CT scans every 8 weeks PET scans in an initial cohort of patients at baseline and weeks 8 and 16 CA19-9 measurements at baseline and every 8 weeks

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

4

MPACT (CA046) Phase III Trial

Country nab-P + Gem, n Gem, n USA Australia Russia Canada Italy Ukraine Spain Germany Austria France Belgium Total 235 6 3 3 4 1 61 50 33 21 14 431 241 10 5 3 2 2 59 50 30 16 12 430 All, n (%) 476 (55) 120 (14) 100 (12) 63 (7) 37 (4) 26 (3) 16 (2) 8 (1) 6 (1) 6 (1) 3 (< 1) 861 (100) Total of 151 sites enrolled 861 patients between May 8, 2009, and April 17, 2012

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

5

Baseline Characteristics

Variable Age Sex KPS Median years (min, max) ≥ 65 years old, % Male, % 90-100, % 70-80, % Pancreatic primary location Current site(s) of metastasis No. of metastatic sites Previous Whipple Biliary stent Head, % Body, % Tail, % Lung, % Liver, % 1, % 2, % ≥ 3, % Yes, % Yes, % CA19-9 a Normal, % > ULN-< 59

×

ULN, % ≥ 59

×

ULN, %

ULN, upper limit of normal.

a CA19-9 at baseline was unknown in 13% of patients.

nab-P + Gem (n = 431) 62 (27, 86) 41 57 58 42 44 31 24 35 85 8 47 45 7 19 14 28 46 Gem (n = 430) 63 (32, 88) 44 60 62 38 42 32 26 43 84 5 48 47 7 16 13 28 45 All Patients (N = 861) 63 (27, 88) 42 58 60 40 43 31 25 39 84 6 47 46 7 17 13 28 46

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

6

Overall Survival

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

Events/n (%) nab-P + Gem Gem 333/431 (77) 359/430 (83) OS, months Median (95% CI) 8.5 (7.89-9.53) 6.7 (6.01-7.23) 75th Percentile 14.8

11.4

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

HR = 0.72

95% CI (0.617-0.835) P = 0.000015

0.0

0 Pts at risk nab-P + Gem: Gem: 431 430 3 357 340 6 269 220 9 169 124 12 108 69 15 67 40 18 Months 40 26 21 27 15 24 16 7 27 9 3 30 4 1 33 1 0 36 1 0 39 0 0

• Subsequent therapy: 38% for

nab

-P + Gem and 42% for Gem • OS censored at time of secondary therapy: 9.4 vs 6.8 months; HR 0.68;

P

• Trial conclusions not impacted by secondary therapies = 0.00007

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

7

Overall Survival

Rate

Time Points, months 6 9 12 18 24 nab-P + Gem Survival, % Gem Survival, % Increase, % P Value 67 48 35 16 9 55 36 22 9 4 22 33 59 78 125 0.00074

0.00067 0.00020

0.00803

0.02123

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

8

OS —Prespecified Subgroups

Group All patients Age < 65 years Age ≥ 65 years Female Male KPS 70-80 KPS 90-100 Primary tumor location: head Primary tumor location: other Liver metastases No liver metastases 1 metastatic site 2 metastatic sites 3 metastatic sites > 3 metastatic sites Normal CA19-9 CA19-9 ULN to < 59 x ULN CA19 9 ≥ 59 x ULN Australia Eastern Europe Western Europe North America 0.125

HR nab-P + Gem Events/n 333/431 188/254 145/177 138/186 195/245 142/179 187/248 142/191 188/237 290/365 43/66 21/33 159/202 104/136 49/60 47/60 96/122 151/197 50/61 62/64 14/38 207/268 0.25

0.5

Favors nab-P + Gem 1.0

2.0

Favors Gem Gem Events/n 359/430 209/242 150/188 141/173 218/257 146/161 212/268 155/180 201/246 309/360 50/70 16/21 163/206 121/140 59/63 43/56 95/120 171/195 53/59 59/62 17/38 230/271

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

9

HR 0.72

0.65

0.81

0.72

0.72

0.61

0.75

0.59

0.80

0.69

0.86

0.41

0.75

0.79

0.50

1.07

0.83

0.61

0.67

0.84

0.72

0.68

PFS by Independent Review

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

0 Pts at Risk nab-P + Gem: Gem: 431 430 PFS Rate at 6 months 12 months 3 281 209 Events/n (%) nab-P + Gem 277/431 (64) Gem 265/430 (62) PFS, months Median (95% CI) 5.5 (4.47-5.95) 3.7 (3.61-4.04) 75th Percentile 9.2

5.9

6 9 122 51 nab-P + Gem 44% 16% 62 23 12 Months 24 10 Gem 25% 9% 15 HR = 0.69

95% CI (0.581-0.821) P = 0.000024 18 21 24 8 6 4 4 2 0 0 0 Increase 76% 78%

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

10

Response Rates

Variable nab-P + Gem (n = 431) Gem (n = 430) P Value Overall response rate

Independent review, % (95% CI) Investigator assessment, % (95% CI)

Disease control rate by independent review, a %

(95% CI) a Includes CR + PR + SD ≥ 16 weeks.

23 (19.1-27.2) 29 (25.0-33.8) 48 (43.0-52.6) 7 (5.0-10.1) 8 (5.3-10.6) 1.1 x 10 −10 3.3 x 10 −16 33 (28.4-37.5) 7.2 x 10 − 6

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

11

Treatment Exposure

Variable Treatment duration, median months (min, max)

≥ 6 months, %

Relative dose intensity (%), median (min, max)

nab

-P Gem

Cumulative dose, median mg/m ²

nab

-P Gem

nab-P

doses at 125 mg/m², n (%) Gem doses at 1000 mg/m², n (%) nab-P + Gem (n = 421) 3.9

(0.1, 21.9) 32 1425.0

11,400.0

4116.0 ( 71 ) 3731.0 (63) Gem (n = 402) 2.7

(0.1, 21.5) 15 80.6

(16.7, 100.0) 75.2 (14.3, 97.7) - 84.6 (14.1, 100.0) - 9000.0

- 3762.0 (79)

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

12

Safety

Preferred Term Pts with at least 1 AE leading to death, % Grade ≥ 3 hematologic AEs,

a Neutropenia Thrombocytopenia Anemia

% nab-P + Gem (n = 421) 4 38 13 13 Gem (n = 402) 4 27 9 12 Pts who received growth factors, % Febrile neutropenia,

b

% Grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic AEs

b Fatigue Peripheral neuropathy c Diarrhea

in > 5% pts, % Grade ≥ 3 neuropathy

Time to onset, median days Time to improvement by 1 grade, median days Time to improvement to grade ≤ 1, median days Pts who resumed

nab

-P, %

26 3 17 17 6 140 21 29 44 15 1 7 < 1 1 113 29 - --

a Based on laboratory values; b Based on investigator assessment of treatment-related events; c Grouped term. Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

13

Metabolic Response by PET by Independent Review

PET scans were performed in the first 257 patients randomized to receive treatment at PET-equipped centers Outcome nab-P + Gem (n = 130) a Gem (n = 127) a HR P Value Metabolic response by PET, b % 63 38 ORR by CT scan, % 31 11 Median OS in PET cohort, mo 10.5

8.3

a Follow-up scans at 8 weeks (n = 222) and 16 weeks (n = 134).

b PET evaluated by EORTC criteria (Young H, et al.

Eur J Cancer

. 1999;35:1773-1782).

0.71

0.000051

0.0001

0.0096

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

14

CA19-9

Best Response and Landmark OS Analyses

Best Decrease in CA19-9 During Study Decrease in CA19-9 level nab-P + Gem (n = 379) Patients with a decrease, n (%) ≥ 20% Patients with a decrease, n (%) ≥ 90% 230 (61) 117 (31) Gem (n = 371) 162 (44) 51 (14) P Value < 0.0001

< 0.0001

Predictive Value of CA19-9 Response at Week 8 on OS: Landmark Analyses nab-P + Gem Gem HR P Value Decrease in CA19-9 Level at Week 8 n Median OS, mo n Median OS, mo ≥ 20% ≥ 90% 197 59 13.2

13.4

141 34 9.4

9.8

0.59

0.47

< 0.0001

0.0053

Detailed analysis presented by Chiorean et al. (abstract 4058)

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

15

Conclusions from MPACT

1. MPACT study – a large, multi-center, international study performed at community and academic centers 2. OS, PFS, and ORR were superior for nab-P + Gem vs Gem a) Improvement in OS across the entire curve, including median, 1-year, and 2-year survival rates 3. Metabolic response rate by PET and CA19-9 response rates were higher for nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone a) Both were predictors for longer OS

Von Hoff et al., ASCO 2013 16

Conclusions from MPACT (cont)

4. Serious life threatening toxicity not increased; AEs acceptable and manageable 5. nab-P + Gem, a new standard for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, is superior to Gem alone and could become the backbone for new regimens 6. A phase III study of nab-P + Gem in the adjuvant setting is currently in development

Von Hoff et al., ASCO 2013 17

MPACT Team

Von Hoff et al. ASCO 2013.

18