Advertisement


Axel Hauschild, MD, on Melanoma: Findings From the PIVOTAL Trial of Daromun vs Surgery

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Axel Hauschild, MD, of Germany’s University of Kiel and University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, discusses phase III study results on neoadjuvant intralesional daromun vs immediate surgery for patients with fully resectable, locally advanced melanoma (Abstract LBA9501).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
I'd like to report about a study which was called PIVOTAL. It's a clinical trial on Daromun, a new agent which was not discovered so far in a Phase III trial. The trial design is very simple. It was a one-to-one randomization of 260 patients. In one arm is surgery alone for fully resectable stage III melanoma patients with either lymph node or skin metastases. The other arm was a prior treatment, prior to surgery, with four consecutive injections intratumorally, for the skin and lymph nodes with Daromun. I need to explain Daromun briefly because the agent is new. It's a composition of an L19 antibody directed to fibronectin, which is a crucial molecule for the development of neovascularization, particularly in tumors. And this is linked to interleukin 2, which enhances the number of tumor infiltrating lymphocyte in the tumor, and in addition to another antibody, which is linked to the drug, which is very important for the tumor necrosis, the tumor necrosis factor alpha. It's two component brought to one injection, and this has been done four consecutive times. The result of the study is that the primary endpoint, which is relapse three survival is positive. A positive randomized phase III trial and the hazard ratio is 0.59, corresponding to a more than 40% reduction of the risk for recurrence and the risk of death. Secondary endpoints as distant metastasis-free survival were also positive. In the same ballpark, the hazard ratio here is .60, so 40% reduction in the risk to develop distant metastases. I need to mention that there was a study amendment which allowed us to evaluate the tumor specimens, which have been treated by Daromun, and the rate of pathologically confirmed complete responses is 21%. Further read shots on this is following. Of note, there was almost no systemic toxicity. All of the toxicities were local. It was very well tolerated, it was manageable, and the mean number of administered cycles was three, the median number was four. Almost all patients got the full package of four injections. In general, I need to say and conclude, positive phase III trial, met the primary endpoint and it will be submitted primarily to the European medical agencies very soon and we will see what happens. But I hope that we will have a new drug in our treatment armamentarium for stage three melanoma patients with fully resectable disease in the neoadjuvant intention.

Related Videos

Lung Cancer

Minesh P. Mehta, MD, on NSCLC: Tumor Treating Fields for Brain Metastases

Minesh P. Mehta, MD, of Miami Cancer Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida, discusses results from the METIS (EF-25) trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of tumor treating fields therapy following stereotactic radiosurgery in patients with mutation-negative non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and brain metastases. Tumor treating fields therapy prolongs time to intracranial disease progression and may postpone whole-brain radiation therapy without declines in quality of life and cognition (Abstract 2008).

Multiple Myeloma

Xavier P. Leleu, MD, PhD, on Multiple Myeloma: Update on Isatuximab, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone, and Bortezomib

Xavier P. Leleu, MD, PhD, of France’s Université de Poitiers and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, discusses phase III findings showing that isatuximab in combination with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone deepened responses and increased the rate of measurable residual disease negativity vs isatuximab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma (Abstract 7501).

Breast Cancer

Yeon Hee Park, MD, PhD, on Metastatic Breast Cancer: Updated Survival Results of the Young-PEARL Study

Yeon Hee Park, MD, PhD, of South Korea’s Samsung Medical Center and Sungkyunkwan University, discusses phase II findings on palbociclib plus exemestane with a GnRH agonist vs capecitabine in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (LBA1002).

Kidney Cancer

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, FASCO, on RCC: Biomarker Analysis From the CLEAR Trial

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, FASCO, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses phase III findings showing that, in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the benefit of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib in overall response rate does not appear to be affected by such factors as geneexpression signatures for tumorinduced proliferation, PDL1 status, or the mutation status of RCC driver genes.

Bladder Cancer

Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, and Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, on Urothelial Carcinoma: Expert Commentary on Two Key Abstracts

Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Cancer Institute and the University of London, discuss phase III findings from two studies: the first, investigating enfortumab vedotin-ejfv and pembrolizumab vs platinum-based chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer; and the second, looking at nivolumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin vs gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with lymph node–only metastatic disease enrolled in the CheckMate 901 trial (Abstracts 4581 and 4565).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement