1 / 22

Abstract #LBA7511

Abstract #LBA7511. Results of a Randomized, Phase III Trial of nab -Paclitaxel and Carboplatin Compared With Cremophor-based Paclitaxel and Carboplatin as First-line Therapy in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

yuma
Download Presentation

Abstract #LBA7511

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Abstract #LBA7511 Results of a Randomized, Phase III Trial of nab-Paclitaxel and Carboplatin Compared With Cremophor-based Paclitaxel and Carboplatin as First-line Therapy in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer MA Socinski,1I Bondarenko,2 NA Karaseva,3 AM Makhson,4 IO Vynnychenko,5 I Okamoto,6 J Hon,7 V Hirsh,8 P Bhar,9 J Iglesias9 1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 2City Hosp #4, Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine; 3City Oncology Center, St. Petersburg, Russia;4City Oncology Hospital #62, Moscow, Russia; 5Regional Oncology Center, Sumy, Ukraine; 6Kinki University School of Medicine, Osaka-Sayama, Japan; 7Clearview Cancer Inst Onc Specialties, P.C, Huntsville, AL, USA; 8McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 9Abraxis BioScience, Los Angeles, CA

  2. Study Rationale • Platinum-based doublets have reached a therapeutic plateau in advanced NSCLC • Paclitaxel plus carboplatin produces overall response rates of 15-25% (Kelly 2001; Sandler 2006; Schiller 2002) and survival outcomes comparable to all other doublets • The solvent polyoxyethylated castor oil (cremophor) may decrease efficacy and contribute to the toxicities observed with paclitaxel including hypersensitivity reactions and neuropathy • Nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab) paclitaxel has been shown to be more efficacious than solvent-based paclitaxel in MBC (Gradishar 2005)

  3. Biologic Rationale for nab-P • nab-P leverages the gp60 / caveolin-1 / SPARC transcytosis pathway to establish a portal to the tumor microenvironment resulting in high intra-tumoral drug concentration (Desai 2008) • Overexpression of caveolin-1 and SPARC occurs in NSCLC and is associated with poor prognosis (Yoo, 2002; Chin 2005; Koukorakis, 2003)

  4. nab-Paclitaxel With Carboplatin (nab-P/C) in Advanced NSCLC: A Dose-finding Nonrandomized Phase II • A 7 arm trial investigated the safety and efficacy of nab-P/C at both weekly and q3w dosing schedules (Socinski, JTO 5:852-61, 2010) • Weekly nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 d1, 8, 15) plus carbo AUC 6 q3w demonstrated optimal therapeutic index • RR = 48%, median PFS = 6.2 months, median OS = 11.3 months • Grade 3/4 toxicity: neutropenia 64%, neuropathy 8%, thrombocytopenia 20%, anemia 16% • Based on the phase II results, a phase III trial was designed to investigate the efficacy / safety of nab-P/C vs P/C as first-line therapy in advanced NSCLC

  5. Phase III nab-P/C vs P/C Study Design nab-Paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 d1,8,15 Carboplatin AUC 6 d1 No Premedication n = 525 Chemo-naive PS 0-1 Stage IIIb/IV NSCLC N = 1,050 1:1 Paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 d1 Carboplatin AUC 6 d1 With Premedication of Dexamethasone + Antihistamines n = 525 Stratification factors: • Stage (IIIb vs IV) • Age (<70 vs >70) • Sex • Histology (squamous vs nonsquamous) • Geographic region

  6. Study Endpoints Primary endpoint: • Objective response rate by independent radiologic review based on RECIST • complete + partial response (CR, PR) Secondary endpoints: • Progression-free and overall survival • Disease control rate: CR + PR + stable disease (SD) ≥16 weeks • Safety (NCI CTCAE v3)

  7. Study Endpoints Primary endpoint: • Objective response rate by independent radiologic review based on RECIST • complete + partial response (CR, PR) Secondary endpoints: • Progression-free and overall survival • Disease control rate: CR + PR + stable disease (SD) ≥16 weeks • Safety (NCI CTCAE v3)

  8. Patient Eligibility Major Inclusion Histologically/cytologically confirmed adult patients with stage IIIb/IV NSCLC ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 Measurable disease by RECIST Adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function No prior treatment for metastatic disease (adjuvant therapy allowed if it was >1 year prior to study entry) Major Exclusion Active brain metastases (treated, controlled mets allowed) Baseline peripheral neuropathy > grade 2

  9. Statistical ConsiderationsPrimary Endpoint Objective response rate of P/C in ECOG 1594 = 17% Based on the activity of nab-P in MBC, a relative improvement of ~40% for nab-P/C over P/C was assumed (corresponding to an ORR = 24%) Based on this assumption, 525 patients on each arm provides 80% power with a two-sided Type I error of 0.049 to reject the null hypothesis

  10. Patient Accrual Russia 45% (29 sites) Canada 4% (6 sites) Ukraine 24% (16 sites) Japan 14% (21 sites) US 12% (25 sites) Australia 1% (5 sites) Planned enrollment: from Dec 14 2007 to Aug 1, 2009 Actual enrollment: from Dec 14 2007 to July 14, 2009 Planned follow-up: 18 months # of patients enrolled: 1052 # of patients evaluable for efficacy: 1052 # of patients evaluable for toxicity: 1038

  11. Results: Baseline Demographics * Data was missing for 1 pt at the time of this analysis

  12. Dose Intensity and Administered Cycles There was no limitation on the # of cycles

  13. Primary Endpoint Results Objective Responses – All Histologies Response Ratio = 1.31 (1.082 – 1.593) P = 0.005 Percent Responses

  14. Primary Endpoint Results Objective Responses – All Histologies Response Ratio = 1.31 (1.082 – 1.593) P = 0.005 Response Ratio = 1.26 (1.060 – 1.496) P = 0.008 (n = 521) Percent Responses (n = 531)

  15. Objective Responses by Histology* Squamous P < 0.001 P = 0.060 Percent Responses n = 228 n = 221 * Not a pre-specified endpoint

  16. Objective Responses by Histology* Squamous Nonsquamous P < 0.001 P = 0.060 P = 0.808 P = 0.069 Percent Responses n = 228 n = 221 n = 292 n = 310 * Not a pre-specified endpoint

  17. Safety * Favors nab-P/C; ** Favors P/C No hypersensitivity reaction occurred in the nab-P/C arm without prophylactic premedication, while 3 occurred in the P/C arm (grade 1, 2, and 3, respectively).

  18. Safety * Favors nab-P/C; ** Favors P/C No hypersensitivity reaction occurred in the nab-P/C arm without prophylactic premedication, while 3 occurred in the P/C arm (grade 1, 2, and 3, respectively).

  19. Safety * Favors nab-P/C; ** Favors P/C No hypersensitivity reaction occurred in the nab-P/C arm without prophylactic premedication, while 3 occurred in the P/C arm (grade 1, 2, and 3, respectively).

  20. Conclusions • In this phase III randomized trial, nab-P/C demonstrated a statistically significant higher response rate than P/C (33% vs 25 %, P < 0.001). • The response rate in the squamous cell subset was 41% in the nab-P/C arm vs 24% in the P/C arm (P < 0.001). • nab-P/C was well tolerated and associated with less sensory neuropathy, myalgia, and neutropenia than P/C. • nab-P/C was associated with more anemia and thrombocytopenia than P/C. • Progression-free survival analysis is planned for later this year.

  21. Acknowledgments We would like to thank all of the participating patients and their families, as well as the global network of investigators, research nurses, study coordinators, and operations staff.

  22. Acknowledgments We would like to thank all of the participating patients and their families, as well as the global network of investigators, research nurses, study coordinators, and operations staff. Thank you

More Related