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).
Preclinical studies demonstrated that dual inhibition of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathways delay the emergence of resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), and in trials with first-generation EGFR TKIs, the combination of EGFR VEGF pathway inhibitors prolonged progression-free survival (PFS).
The RAMOSE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03909334, HCRN LUN-18-335) is a randomized, open-label multicenter phase II study comparing osimertinib with ramucirumab (arm A) to osimertinib (arm B) for initial treatment of metastatic EGFR-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with 2:1 random assignment. The primary end point is PFS for evaluable patients; secondary end points include objective response rates (ORRs), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival, and safety. The stratification criteria were EGFR mutation type and the presence of CNS metastasis.
At data cutoff on August 29, 2023, 160 patients consented, 147 patients received treatment, and 139 patients were evaluable with at least one scan. In this preplanned interim analysis, the median follow-up was 16.6 months. Among the evaluable patients, 57 PFS events occurred. The median PFS was 24.8 (A) versus 15.6 (B) months (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.93]; log-rank P = .023), 12-month PFS rate was 76.7% (A) versus 61.9% (B; P = .026). No significant difference was observed in the ORRs and DCRs between arms. Any-grade (G) adverse events (AEs) occurred in 100% (A) and 98% (B) of patients, with no G5 treatment-related AE (TRAE), one G4 TRAE (hyponatremia, A), and 53% (A) versus 41% (B) G3 TRAEs. AE-related discontinuation occurred in 13 patients (9.7% in A and 8.7% in B). The safety profile was in line with known safety of each drug.
Ramucirumab plus osimertinib significantly prolonged PFS compared with osimertinib alone in patients with TKI-naïve EGFR-mutant NSCLC. The combination is safe and well tolerated.
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).
Superior to osi (23 vs 16 progression-free survival). This is more toxic though, but seems manageable. Could this be a new first line standard of care? Also, this includes brain penetration data.
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.
