Advertisement


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

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

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).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Trastuzumab deruxtecan, or T-DXd, is a potent HER2-directed antibody-drug conjugate. It is already standard of care for patients with HER2-low as well as HER2-high expressing breast cancers, with HER2-positive gastric cancer, as well as HER2-mutant lung cancer. However, we already know that HER2 is expressed across a variety of tumor types. In this patient population, there's unmet clinical needs since there's no HER2-targeted therapies approved. In the T-DXd early studies, we saw activity across a variety of tumor types, including salivary tumors, endometrial cancer, and biliary cancer. Therefore, we did a phase II clinical trial looking at the activity of T-DXd across tumor types. We enrolled patients with advanced diseases, looking at patients that had immunochemistry of 2+ or 3+, either with a local test or with a central test. If patients had local testing, we also looked back retrospectively with central testing. We enrolled patients across a variety of tumor types, including specific cohorts for biliary cancer, endometrial cancer, cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, bladder cancer, but also had another tumor cohort that allowed for a variety of tumor types excluding these diseases, but also excluding breast cancer, gastric cancer, colon cancer, and lung cancer. The objective response rate by investigator assessment was the primary endpoint of this study. The study demonstrated that in the 276 patients enrolled overall, the objective response rate by investigator assessment was 37%. Looking across the board, we saw that this duration of response in this patient population was 11.8 months. When we looked across tumors types, we saw activity across a variety of tumor types with really high objective response rates, especially in gynecological tumors, greater in the 40% to greater than 50% rate. We also saw meaningful clinical activity in the biliary cancer and bladder cancer cohort, as well as the other tumor bucket. The one tumor type we had where we have less activity was in pancreatic cancer, where we had one objective response rate in the 25 patients enrolled in that study in the study, and 3 objective responses by central review objective responses for a 12% objective response rate. We also had a 68% stable response rate in the overall pancreatic cancer cohort. We also looked at the responses by immunochemistry based on central assessment. So although, overall, the objective response rate was 37%, when we looked at those patients that immunochemistry confirming 3+ expression, we saw that the objective response rate was 61%. Of those that were 2+ on central assessment, objective response rate was 27%. Looking across tumor types, we saw that many of the tumor types had a greater than 50% objective response rate with if the IHC was 3+. Notably, in pancreas where our activity was less, we only had two patients that were IHC 3+. Importantly, the duration of response overall was 11.8 months. Of those patients where the IHC was 3+, the duration of response was 22.1 months. In the study, we saw that the safety was very similar with T-DXd studies previously reported, with the adverse events most commonly being nausea, vomiting, neutropenia, anemia. Further, we assessed the interstitial lung disease rate and that was 7.5% overall, most were grade 1, grade 2, however, we did have one ILD related death. Cumulatively, looking at the data, the results are really very compelling. We saw that there was activity across a variety of tumor types. Objective response rate overall was 37% and the objective response rate in IHC 3+ patients was 61%. The duration of response was especially remarkable in a heavily pretreated population. It was 11.8 months in the overall population in 22.1 months in the 3+ population. These are interim results and we'll be reporting overall survival and progression-free survival at a later date. But, data to date suggests that T-DXd is active across a variety of tumor types and may represent a new treatment option for patients that are HER2-expressing.

Related Videos

Kidney Cancer
Immunotherapy

Rana R. McKay, MD, and Brian I. Rini, MD, on Clear Cell RCC: New Data From KEYNOTE-426 on Pembrolizumab Plus Axitinib vs Sunitinib

Rana R. McKay, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and Brian I. Rini, MD, of Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, discuss the 5-year follow-up results with the combination of a checkpoint inhibitor plus a VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor as first-line treatment for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Pembrolizumab plus axitinib continued to demonstrate improved survival outcomes as well as overall response rate vs sunitinib for patients with previously untreated disease (Abstract LBA4501).

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).

Breast Cancer

Lisa A. Carey, MD, and Dennis J. Slamon, MD, PhD, on Early Breast Cancer: Findings From the NATALEE Trial on Ribociclib Plus Endocrine Therapy

Lisa A. Carey, MD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Dennis J. Slamon, MD, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, discuss phase III study findings on ribociclib plus endocrine therapy as adjuvant treatment in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. When added to standard-of-care endocrine therapy, ribociclib improved invasive disease–free survival with a well-tolerated safety profile (Abstract LBA500).

Lung Cancer
Immunotherapy

Narjust Florez, MD, and Heather A. Wakelee, MD, on Early-Stage NSCLC: Phase III Findings From KEYNOTE-671 on Pembrolizumab and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy

Narjust Florez, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Heather A. Wakelee, MD, of Stanford University, Stanford Cancer Institute, discuss new data supporting neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant pembrolizumab as a promising new treatment option for patients with resectable stage II, IIIA, or IIIB (N2) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (Abstract LBA100).

Gynecologic Cancers

Marie Plante, MD, on Cervical Cancer: New Data on Hysterectomy and Pelvic Node Dissection

Marie Plante, MD, of Canada’s Université Laval and the CHUQ Hotel Dieu de Québec, discusses phase III results from a study that compared radical hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection vs simple hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection in patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. The pelvic recurrence rate at 3 years in the women who underwent simple hysterectomy is not inferior to those who had radical hysterectomy. In addition, fewer surgical complications and better quality of life were observed with simple hysterectomy (LBA5511).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement