Overall Survival with Inavolisib in PIK3CA-Mutated Advanced Breast Cancer

Author(s): Komal L. Jhaveri, M.D.1,2; Seock-Ah Im, M.D., Ph.D.3; Cristina Saura, M.D., Ph.D.4; Sibylle Loibl, M.D., Ph.D.5,6; Kevin Kalinsky, M.D.7; Peter Schmid, M.D., Ph.D.8; Sherene Loi, M.D., Ph.D.9,10; Eirini Thanopoulou, M.D., Ph.D.11; Noopur Shankar, M.D., Ph.D.12; Yanling Jin, Ph.D.13; Thomas J. Stout, Ph.D.12; Tiffany D. Clark, Ph.D.12; Chunyan Song, M.D.12; Dejan Juric, M.D.14; Nicholas C. Turner, M.D., Ph.D.15;
Source: DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2501796

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

The INAVO120 trial assessed inavolisib + palbociclib–fulvestrant vs placebo plus palbociclib–fulvestrant in PIK3CA-mutated, HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, showing significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) (15.0 vs 7.3 months) and overall survival (OS) (34.0 vs 27.0 months). The triplet regimen achieved a higher overall response rate (ORR) (62.7% vs 28.0%), establishing it as a potential new standard for this endocrine-resistant population. Notably, side effects like hyperglycemia, stomatitis, diarrhea, and ocular effects were more frequent with inavolisib.

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3, double-blind, randomized INAVO120 trial, treatment with inavolisib plus palbociclib–fulvestrant led to a significant progression-free survival benefit, as compared with placebo plus palbociclib–fulvestrant, among patients with PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had had relapse during or within 12 months after completion of adjuvant endocrine therapy.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had had disease recurrence or progression during or within 12 months after completion of adjuvant endocrine therapy to receive inavolisib plus palbociclib–fulvestrant (inavolisib group) or placebo plus palbociclib–fulvestrant (placebo group). In the current report, we provide the results of the final analysis of overall survival, including updated data on efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients were assigned to the inavolisib group, and 164 to the placebo group. After a median follow-up of 34.2 months in the inavolisib group and 32.3 months in the placebo group, the median overall survival was 34.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.4 to 44.8) with inavolisib and 27.0 months (95% CI, 22.8 to 38.7) with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.94; P=0.02 [prespecified boundary for statistical significance, P<0.0469]). An objective response occurred in 62.7% (95% CI, 54.8 to 70.2) of patients in the inavolisib group and 28.0% (95% CI, 21.3 to 35.6) of those in the placebo group (P<0.001). The updated hazard ratio for disease progression or death was 0.42 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.55). Adverse events led to discontinuation of inavolisib in 6.8% of patients and discontinuation of placebo in 0.6%. The incidence of hyperglycemia, stomatitis or mucosal inflammation, gastrointestinal toxic effects (e.g., diarrhea), and ocular toxic effects (e.g., dry eye and blurred vision) was higher with inavolisib than with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with inavolisib plus palbociclib–fulvestrant led to a significant overall survival benefit, as compared with placebo plus palbociclib–fulvestrant. Hyperglycemia, stomatitis or mucosal inflammation, gastrointestinal toxic effects, and ocular toxic effects were reported more frequently with inavolisib than with placebo. (Funded by F. Hoffmann–La Roche; INAVO120 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04191499.)

Author Affiliations

1Breast and Early Drug Development Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York; 2Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; 3Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea; 4Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona; 5German Breast Group, Neu-Isenburg, Frankfurt, Germany; 6Center for Hematology and Oncology Bethanien, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany; 7Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, Atlanta; 8Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London; 9Division of Cancer Research and Clinical Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 10Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Medical Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia; 11Roche, Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom; 12Genentech, San Francisco; 13Hoffmann–La Roche, Mississauga, ON, Canada; 14Mass General Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston; 15Royal Marsden Hospital and Institute of Cancer Research, London;

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

The Pathologic Response Evaluation and Detection in Circulating Tumor-DNA Study: Ultrasensitive Circulating Tumor-DNA Assessment of Breast Cancer Minimal Residual Disease

Primary objective not met, ctDNA clearance post- neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) cannot reliably predict pathologic complete response (pCR) and shouldn't be used to defer surgery. But the prognostic data are striking: post-NAT ctDNA positivity independently predicted recurrence in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (HR 8.9), and the postsurgical landmark analysis is essentially binary, 100% of ctDNA-positive patients recurred while 94% of ctDNA-negative patients were disease-free at 5 years (HR 128). Not practice-changing yet pending prospective utility trials, but this strongly validates ultrasensitive ctDNA as a prognostic tool and a smart enrollment biomarker for future escalation/de-escalation trials.

Read More »

Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant TQB2102 in Locally Advanced or Early Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase II Trial

The QUIWI study used quizartinib, a FLT3 drug added to standard chemo induction/consolidation in FLT-negative acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. There was a meaningful overall survival (OS) improvement across all age and risk groups including the NPM1+ population. They purposefully used a higher dose to achieve what is felt to be off-target TKI activity in familiar pathways of KIT, PDGRF…etc.

Read More »

Sacituzumab Govitecan plus Pembrolizumab for Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

This really feels like a first-line practice changer in PD-L1+ MTNBC—the sacituzumab govitecan/pembrolizumab combination delivering a 3.4-month progression-free survival (PFS) improvement and pushing median PFS past 11 months is quite meaningful. Mature overall survival (OS) data will be interesting to see. Remember to watch closely and consider screening for drug-induced interstitial lung disease(ILD).

Read More »