Advertisement


Narjust Florez, MD, and Ticiana Leal, MD, on Metastatic NSCLC: Tumor Treating Fields Therapy After Platinum Resistance

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Narjust Florez, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Ticiana Leal, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, discuss the use of tumor treating fields therapy, in which electric fields disrupt processes critical for cancer cell viability. Already approved by the FDA to treat glioblastoma and mesothelioma, the treatment has extended overall survival in this phase III study of patients with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy, without exacerbating systemic toxicities (Abstract LBA9005).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Narjust Florez, MD: So first before we talk about anything, what are the tumor treating fields? Ticiana Leal, MD: Tumor treating fields are electric fields that exert physical forces on electrically charged components of dividing cells. It has an anti-mitotic effect. So it disrupts mitosis and the downstream effects of that include that it leads to immunogenic cell death. It triggers a systemic antitumor immune response. So tumor treating fields therapy is a treatment that is delivered local regionally. So there's a portable medical device, and two pairs of arrays that are applied to the chest. Narjust Florez, MD: So these are vests that the patients will wear, where they receive the therapy. Ticiana Leal, MD: So these are adhesive bandages that are applied to the chest. And the company creates these personalized arrays that are outlines of the therapy, that are dependent on the size of the tumor, the CT scans of the patient. As well as whether they're male or female. And then these are prescribed by the clinician. And the device itself is actually delivered to the patient's home with 24/7 support from a device technician. That will come to the patient's home, explain how to use the device, and also to help troubleshoot the device. Narjust Florez, MD: This is really innovative. This is a device that we're bringing to a level of precision oncology. So could you summarize for us, and quickly, the design of the study that you're presented at ASCO? Ticiana Leal, MD: So the LUNAR study is a pivotal randomized Phase 3 study that included 276 patients. Randomized one-to-one to tumor treating fields therapy, plus standard of care. Which included immune checkpoint inhibitors, or docetaxel versus the standard of care. Patients then were followed every six weeks and continued on therapy until disease progression. The study was designed to evaluate the safety of an efficacy of tumor treating fields therapy plus standard of care, versus standard of care alone in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer that had had progression of their disease on/or after platinum-based chemotherapy. So this is a population of high unmet need in the second line and beyond. As you know, after progression on docetaxel, or after progression on frontline chemo immunotherapy, there are limited treatment options. And our prior approval of docetaxel RAM was now back in 2014. So this is the first study since then that has shown an improved overall survival in this patient population. Narjust Florez, MD: So this is for heavily pretreated patients. And you are correct, this is a very large need. So what are some of the main results from this study that you can share with us? Ticiana Leal, MD: The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival in the ITT population, which included patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors as well as docetaxel. The primary endpoint of overall survival was met. The study showed that the addition of tumor treating fields to standard of care, led to a statistically significant improvement in overall survival. We saw median overall survival of 9.9 months in the standard of care arm, to 13.2 months in the experimental arm. The P-value and the hazard ratios were statistically significant. The hazard ratio is 0.74, with a P-value of less than 0.035. So this is something that is practice changing. It's potentially a paradigm shift in how we treat non-small cell lung cancer in the second line and beyond. And importantly, without added systemic toxicities and no negative impact on health related quality of life measures that we looked at in this study. Narjust Florez, MD: As we're almost finishing the conversation, what were some of the unique adverse events from the tumor treating fields therapy? Ticiana Leal, MD: Overall, the treatment was well tolerated. Thinking about grade three adverse events, or greater, between the two arms, they were very similar. The one key adverse event that was unique to tumor treating fields was dermatitis. All grades dermatitis was seen in 43% of the patients. However, grade three or higher adverse events was quite low, at about 2%. So the majority of these events of dermatitis were grade one and two in nature. And dermatitis resolved in 87% of the cases. The median duration was about three weeks. Narjust Florez, MD: Anything else you would like to add from the study for our listeners. Ticiana Leal, MD: I'd like to highlight some of the other endpoints of our study. Secondary endpoints of the study included overall survival in the ICI or immune checkpoint inhibitor treated subgroups, as well as the docetaxel treated subgroups. In the immune checkpoint inhibitor treated subgroups, we actually saw a really striking improvement in overall survival. Where the median overall survival nearly doubled from 10.8 months in the immune checkpoint inhibitor alone group, versus 18.5 months in the TTF plus ICI subgroup. And there we saw hazard ratio of 0.63, with a P-value of 0.005. In addition, in the docetaxel treated subgroups, we saw there that the median overall survival in the docetaxel alone arm was 9.9 months, versus 11.1 months in the docetaxel TT field subgroup. The hazard ratio there is 0.81, and the P-value is 0.28. Narjust Florez, MD: And my last question is, how would you explain this study to a patient and their families? Ticiana Leal, MD: So this study to patients and to their families, I would explain that the results of the LUNAR trial led to improved survival, helping patients live longer with the addition of tumor treating fields to standard of care therapy. Explaining to them that this is a medical device. This is a medical device that patients have to have at home. It's supplied local regionally with two pairs of adhesive bandages that are applied to the chest, according to a plan that is specifically created for them by the company to treat their tumors. In addition, I would explain to them that the recommendation is for use that is continuous use. The target here is to use it for 75%, or greater, in their day. They do have to carry the device with them while they're using it, either in a backpack, or maybe a purse, or something that it will fit the device in. And then importantly, they'll continue their care with their clinician in the clinic coming in for their systemic therapy. Whether that's an immune checkpoint inhibitor or docetaxel. And then certainly would educate them on what to watch out for in terms of side effects. Specifically the dermatitis, and then how to manage the dermatitis in the clinic. Narjust Florez, MD: Thank you so much, Dr. Leal. This is certainly very innovative. And thank you for your time with the ASCO Post. Ticiana Leal, MD: Thank you.

Related Videos

Prostate Cancer

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Praful Ravi, MRCP, MBBChir, on Localized Prostate Cancer: Prognostic Impact of PSA Nadir

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Praful Ravi, MRCP, MBBChir, both of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discuss an individual patient-data analysis of randomized trials from the ICECAP collaborative. A PSA nadir of ≥ 0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after radiotherapy completion was prognostic for prostate cancer–specific, metastasis-free, and overall survival in patients receiving radiotherapy plus androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. These findings may help identify patients for therapy de-escalation trials (Abstract 5002).

CNS Cancers

Lisa M. DeAngelis, MD, and Ingo K. Mellinghoff, MD, on Glioma: Phase III Results on Vorasidenib

Lisa M. DeAngelis, MD, and Ingo K. Mellinghoff, MD, both of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, discuss findings from the INDIGO trial showing that the IDH1/2 inhibitor vorasidenib improves progression-free survival for patients with residual or recurrent grade 2 glioma with an IDH1/2 mutation. These data demonstrate the clinical benefit of vorasidenib in this patient population for whom chemotherapy and radiotherapy are being delayed.

Solid Tumors

Funda Meric-Bernstam, MD, on HER2-Expressing Solid Tumors: Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan

Funda Meric-Bernstam, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses interim results from the DESTINY-PanTumor02 trial, the first tumor-agnostic global study of fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (T-DXd) in a broad range of HER2-expressing solid tumors. This agent showed an encouraging overall response rate, particularly in patients with IHC 3+ expression; durable clinical benefit; and a manageable safety profile in these heavily pretreated patients. T-DXd may be a potential new treatment option for this population (Abstract LBA3000).

Gynecologic Cancers

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, and Kathleen N. Moore, MD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Findings on Mirvetuximab Soravtansine vs Chemotherapy

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and Kathleen N. Moore, MD, of the Stephenson Oklahoma Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, discuss phase III results from the MIRASOL trial, which showed that mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx prolonged overall survival vs investigator’s choice chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with high folate receptor-alpha expression. The findings suggest a new standard of care for this disease (Abstract LBA5507).

Gynecologic Cancers
Immunotherapy

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, Isabelle L. Ray-Coquard, MD, PhD, on Cervical Squamous Carcinoma: Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and Isabelle L. Ray-Coquard, MD, PhD, of Centre Léon Bérard and the University Claude Bernard Lyon Est, discuss findings from the COLIBRI trial, which showed that, for patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab is safe and orchestrates de novo immune responses. The 82.5% complete response rate for primary tumors 6 months after standard chemoradiation therapy suggests favorable clinical outcomes (Abstract 5501). 

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement