Sacituzumab Govitecan Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label Phase III EVOKE-01 Study

Author(s): Luis G. Paz-Ares, MD, PhD¹; Oscar Juan-Vidal, MD²; Giannis S. Mountzios, MD, PhD³; Enriqueta Felip, MD, PhD⁴; Niels Reinmuth, MD⁵; Filippo de Marinis, MD, PhD⁶; Nicolas Girard, MD, PhD⁷; Vipul M. Patel, MD⁸; Takayuki Takahama, MD, PhD⁹; Scott P. Owen, MD¹⁰; Douglas M. Reznick, MD¹¹; Firas B. Badin, MD¹²; Irfan Cicin, MD¹³; Sabeen Mekan, MD¹⁴; Riddhi Patel, PharmD¹⁴; Eric Zhang, PhD¹⁴; Divyadeep Karumanchi, PharmD¹⁴; Marina Chiara Garassino, MD¹⁵

Source: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.0073

Dr. Maen Hussein's Thoughts

Failed? Numerical overall survival (OS) benefit for sacituzumab vs docetaxol, but not statistically significant. Better tolerated, also overall survival (OS) noticed more in patients who did not respond to antiPDL-1 therapy.

PURPOSE

The open-label, phase III EVOKE-01 study evaluated sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus standard-of-care docetaxel in metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with progression on/after platinum-based chemotherapy, anti–PD-(L)1, and targeted treatment for actionable genomic alterations (AGAs). Primary analysis is reported.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by histology, best response to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen, and AGA treatment received or not) to SG (one 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8) or docetaxel (one 75 mg/m2 intravenous infusion on day 1) in 21-day cycles. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, patient-reported symptom assessment, and safety.

RESULTS

In the intention-to-treat population (SG, n = 299; docetaxel, n = 304), 55.4% had one previous line of therapy. Median follow-up was 12.7 months (range, 6.0-24.0). The primary end point was not met. There was a numerical OS improvement for SG versus docetaxel (median, 11.1 v 9.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.04]; one-sided P = .0534), consistent across squamous and nonsquamous histologies. Median PFS was 4.1 versus 3.9 months (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.11]). An OS benefit was observed for SG (n = 192) versus docetaxel (n = 191) in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen (3.5-month median OS increase; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.97]); this was consistent across histologies. Among patients receiving SG and docetaxel, 6.8% and 14.2% discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), respectively; 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, had TRAEs leading to death.

CONCLUSION

Although statistical significance was not met, OS numerically improved with SG versus docetaxel, which was consistent across histologies. Clinically meaningful improvement in OS was noted in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen. SG was better tolerated than docetaxel and consistent with its known safety profile, with no new safety signals.

Author Affiliations

¹Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, H12O-CNIO Lung Cancer Unit, Complutense University and Ciberonc, Madrid, Spain; ²Hospital Universitari i Politécnic La Fe de Valencia, Valencia, Spain; ³Henry Dunant Hospital Center, Athens, Greece; ⁴Vall d’Hebron University Hospital and Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain; ⁵Asklepios Lung Clinic, German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich-Gauting, Germany; ⁶European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; ⁷Institut du Thorax Curie Montsouris, Institut Curie, Paris, France; ⁸Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Ocala, FL; ⁹Kindai University, Osaka, Japan; ¹⁰McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; ¹¹Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; ¹²Baptist Health Medical Group, Lexington, KY; ¹³Istinye University, Medical Center, Istanbul, Turkey; ¹⁴Gilead Sciences, Inc, Foster City, CA; ¹⁵University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL

Neoadjuvant Osimertinib for Resectable EGFR-Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

The phase III NeoADAURA trial evaluated neoadjuvant osimertinib (OSI) with or without platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) versus CT alone in resectable, EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Both OSI+CT and OSI monotherapy significantly improved major pathologic response (MPR: 26% and 25% vs 2%), and 12-month event-free survival (EFS) rates were higher with OSI-containing regimens (OSI+CT 93%, OSI 95%, CT 83%). Nodal downstaging was also more frequent with OSI arms (53% vs 21%). Neoadjuvant OSI—with or without CT—looks like a real step forward for our EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients, especially given the robust pathologic responses and high rates of surgical completion.

Phase III Study of Mediastinal Lymph Node Dissection for Ground Glass Opacity–Dominant Lung Adenocarcinoma

This large, well-done study compared systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection (LND) versus no LND in patients with GGO-dominant invasive lung adenocarcinoma (CTR ≤0.5, ≤3 cm, cT1N0M0). Interim analysis of 302 patients showed no lymph node metastases in either arm, with both groups achieving 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of 100% at the time of analysis. The no LND arm had significantly shorter surgery duration (74 vs 109 min), less blood loss (44 vs 82 mL), shorter hospital stays (3.9 vs 4.5 days), and fewer grade ≥2 complications (3.3% vs 9.3%). Based on these findings, the trial was terminated early for nonmaleficence, and the authors recommend omitting systematic mediastinal LND in this population. In short, for carefully selected GGO-dominant lung adenocarcinoma, skipping mediastinal LND appears safe and spares patients’ unnecessary morbidity—this could be a real practice-changer for our early-stage, node-negative cases.

Overall Survival with Amivantamab–Lazertinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC

The phase 3 MARIPOSA trial compared amivantamab–lazertinib (Ami-Laz) to osimertinib (Osi) in untreated EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), showing a significant overall survival (OS) benefit for Ami-Laz (3-yr OS was 60% vs 51%). Median OS was not reached for Ami-Laz vs 36.7 months for Osi, with a projected >12-month median OS advantage. Ami-Laz also improved time to symptomatic progression (43.6 vs 29.3 months) and showed durable intracranial control, though grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were higher (80% vs 52%), notably skin, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and infusion reactions. In short, Ami-Laz is emerging as a new standard for first-line EGFRm NSCLC, but we’ll need to be proactive about managing its toxicity profile in clinic and whether this is superior or equivalent to Osi + chemo is currently unclear.

Adagrasib versus docetaxel in KRASG12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (KRYSTAL-12): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Adagrasib demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.5 months compared to 3.8 months with docetaxel in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated tumors. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 47% of patients receiving Adagrasib and 46% in the docetaxel group. In my experience, Adagrasib is also more tolerable, making it a favorable option for this patient population.

Overall Survival with Neoadjuvant Nivolumab plus Chemotherapy in Lung Cancer

There was a 28% reduction in mortality. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or clearance of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) also experienced better outcomes.