Advertisement


Alfredo Carrato, MD, PhD, on Pancreatic Cancer: Nab-Paclitaxel, Gemcitabine, and FOLFOX for Metastatic Disease

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Alfredo Carrato, MD, PhD, of Alcala de Henares University in Spain, discusses phase II results from the SEQUENCE trial, which showed that nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and modified FOLFOX showed significantly higher clinical activity than the standard nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in the first-line setting of patients with untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (Abstract 4022).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
It's a pleasure for me to show the results of the SEQUENCE trial. The SEQUENCE trial was a randomized phase two trial in pancreatic cancer patients, metastatic ones on first line and we tried to increase the efficacy of the regimens used for treating these patients. So the rational that there were two subtypes of pancreatic cancer, the basal one responded better to Nab-Paclitaxel Gemcitabine and the classical one better to FOLFIRINOX. So as it was impossible to give both regimens at the same time for toxicity issues, we decided to give them sequentially first Nab-Paclitaxel Gemcitabine, and then not FOLFIRINOX, FOLFOX because we thought that the oxaliplatin was the main drug of the combination. And on top of that, we had that Nab-Paclitaxel was given up front and it was depleting this trauma and allowing the drugs to get in touch more efficiently with the tumor cells. So we performed a phase I trial, and we were surprised because we were expecting some neurological toxicity, but no neurologic toxicity appeared and it was safe at full doses and it was published at the European General Cancer two years ago. Then we designed this randomized phase two trial, trying to increase 50% the survival of patients at one year. It was from 35% to 50%, more or less. So with these things in mind, we designed a trial in which 78 patients per arm were needed and the safety results showed that neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher in the experimental arm, significantly higher, 47% and 26% and the efficacy at 12 months hypothesis was met. We found that 55.5% of patients were alive at one year in the experimental arm and only 35% in the control arm, which was Nab-Paclitaxel and gem without FOLFOX. So we looked for other efficacy parameters, like time to progression free survival, overall survival, and all of them were positive. In favor of the experimental arm. We reached a median overall survival of 13.2 months versus 9.5 months in the control arm. The hazard ratio was lower to 0.65 and this was real good surprise because we have discovered a new treatment option for our patients and pancreatic cancer patients have few good news. In the last 20 years, just two trials demonstrated an increase in efficacy rates. One of them was the Nab-Paclitaxel Gemcitabine and now against this regimen, we have demonstrated a superiority in efficacy. So we are happy about that and because our patients will live longer and have another option for treatment. This is only for a core zero and one patients, it's only for well fit patients, not for performance status, middle, core two, or very old patients but when you have these patients, this regimen provides excellent results.

Related Videos

Lung Cancer
Immunotherapy

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, and Karen L. Reckamp, MD, on NSCLC: Overall Survival Results With Ramucirumab Plus Pembrolizumab vs Standard of Care

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, of the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami, and Karen L. Reckamp, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discuss phase II findings from substudy S1800A of the Lung-MAP protocol. The data showed that ramucirumab and pembrolizumab improved overall survival compared with the standard of care for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer who were previously treated with immunotherapy and platinum-based chemotherapy (Abstract 9004).

 

Sarcoma

Martin McCabe, PhD, on Ewing Sarcoma: Assessment of Topotecan, Cyclophosphamide, and High-Dose Ifosfamide

Martin McCabe, PhD, of the University of Manchester, discusses a phase III assessment of chemotherapy for patients with recurrent and primary refractory Ewing sarcoma. The trial, called rEECur, is the first study to provide comparative toxicity and survival data for the four most commonly used chemotherapy regimens in this disease. The analysis showed that high-dose ifosfamide is more effective in prolonging survival than topotecan plus cyclophosphamide (Abstract LBA2).

Head and Neck Cancer
Supportive Care

Carryn M. Anderson, MD, on Head and Neck Cancer: New Data on Avasopasem Manganese for Oral Mucositis

Carryn M. Anderson, MD, of the University of Iowa Hospital, discusses phase III results of the ROMAN trial of avasopasem manganese for patients with severe oral mucositis who are receiving chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced, nonmetastatic head and neck cancer. Compared with placebo, avasopasem manganese improved severe oral mucositis (Abstract 6005).

Bladder Cancer

Karim Chamie, MD, on Bladder Cancer: Final Results on N-803 and Bacillus Calmette-Guérin

Karim Chamie, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, discusses final clinical results on combining the superagonist N-803 with bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) in patients whose carcinoma in situ and high-grade non–muscle-invasive bladder cancers are unresponsive to BCG alone. Of note, cystectomy was avoided in more than 90% of patients with 2 years of follow-up (Abstract 4508).

Bladder Cancer

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, on Urothelial Carcinoma: New Results on Cabozantinib Plus Atezolizumab

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, of City of Hope National Medical Center, discusses findings from the COSMIC-021 study, which showed that cabozantinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated encouraging clinical activity with manageable toxicity in patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The combination was administered as first-line therapy in cisplatin-based chemotherapy–eligible and –ineligible patients and as second- or later-line treatment in those who received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors (Abstract 4504).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement