We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.
The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ...
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.
Bispecific (a bispecific antibody targeting programmed cell death 1 protein and vascular endothelial growth factor) and chemotherapy … and it worked … second line after EGFR therapy failure.
For patients with non–small cell lung cancer whose disease progressed while receiving EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy, particularly third-generation TKIs, optimal treatment options remain limited.
To compare the efficacy of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone for patients with relapsed advanced or metastatic non–small cell lung cancer with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) variant.
Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase 3 trial at 55 sites in China enrolled participants from January 2022 to November 2022; a total of 322 eligible patients were enrolled.
Participants received ivonescimab (n = 161) or placebo (n = 161) plus pemetrexed and carboplatin once every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy of ivonescimab plus pemetrexed or placebo plus pemetrexed.
The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population assessed by an independent radiographic review committee (IRRC) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The results of the first planned interim analysis are reported.
Among 322 enrolled patients in the ivonescimab and placebo groups, the median age was 59.6 vs 59.4 years and 52.2% vs 50.9% of patients were female. As of March 10, 2023, median follow-up time was 7.89 months. Median progression-free survival was 7.1 (95% CI, 5.9-8.7) months in the ivonescimab group vs 4.8 (95% CI, 4.2-5.6) months for placebo (difference, 2.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46 [95% CI, 0.34-0.62]; P < .001). The prespecified subgroup analysis showed progression-free survival benefit favoring patients receiving ivonescimab over placebo across almost all subgroups, including patients whose disease progressed while receiving third-generation EGFR-TKI therapy (HR, 0.48 [95% CI 0.35-0.66]) and those with brain metastases (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.22-0.73]). The objective response rate was 50.6% (95% CI, 42.6%-58.6%) with ivonescimab and 35.4% (95% CI, 28.0%-43.3%) with placebo (difference, 15.6% [95% CI, 5.3%-26.0%]; P = .006). The median overall survival data were not mature; at data cutoff, 69 patients (21.4%) had died. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 99 patients (61.5%) in the ivonescimab group vs 79 patients (49.1%) in the placebo group, the most common of which were chemotherapy-related. Grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 patients (6.2%) in the ivonescimab group vs 4 (2.5%) in the placebo group. Grade 3 or higher vascular endothelial growth factor–related adverse events occurred in 5 patients (3.1%) in the ivonescimab group vs 4 (2.5%) in the placebo group.
Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival with tolerable safety profile in TKI-treated non–small cell lung cancer.
Improved progression-free survival (PFS), now we have osimertinib and ramucirumab, amivantamab and Lazertinib (PFS 24.8 vs 23 months but NOT head to head).
Patients were treated with thoracic and extrathoracic radiation to oligometastatic sites and it seems to help with improving survival, something to consider especially with SBRT now. Do our radiation oncologists have additional input?
Very thought-provoking review of immune checkpoint blockade therapy and strategies to possibly de-escalate therapy in the future. Could we reduce doses, extend dose intervals or diminish the duration of treatment? There is some (low-level) data supporting these ideas. However, ongoing prospective studies, mostly being done in countries with nationalized systems, will be informative on these topics. Expect interest in this topic to increase in a couple of years.
Positive trial for the newest ADC on the block, Dato-DXd, is an ADC that delivers a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a TROP2 antibody. PFS was not impressive but favored DDxd at 4.4 vs 3.7 months in the docetaxel arm. This drug is now approved in metastatic breast cancer.
Pembrolizumab in addition to chemotherapy DID NOT help, recall now we have new approval for those patients (datopotamab).
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
