Minesh P. Mehta, MD, on NSCLC: Tumor Treating Fields for Brain Metastases
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting
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).
Transcript
Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
It's a pleasure to be here today to talk about the EF-25 METIS trial. This was a clinical trial evaluating the use of tumor treating fields therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with brain metastasis that are mutation negative. Just under 300 patients, 298 to be precise, were randomized to receiving stereotactic radiosurgery, which is the standard of care for these patients, but is characterized with high rate of intracranial relapse. Following stereotactic radiosurgery, patients received best supportive care in the control arm or best supportive care plus tumor treating fields therapy.
The primary endpoint of the trial was to determine if the rate of intracranial progression and the time to intracranial progression could be altered with the use of tumor treating fields therapy. And in fact, the key top line result of the trial was indeed precisely that. The time to intracranial progression was significantly lengthened in favor of tumor treating fields by 10.6 months, and therefore the median time to progression was 10.3 months in the control arm and 21.9 months in the experimental or tumor treating fields arm. This was a significant prolongation.
In association with this prolongation of tying to intracranial progression, quality of life metrics also favored tumor treating fields therapy. There was a greater sustenance of quality of life and a greater durability of quality of life in patients receiving tumor treating fields therapy. Overall, the safety was exceptionally well tolerated. Only 2.3% of patients experienced grade three or higher toxicities that were device related. This is a very well tolerated therapy and prolongs time to intracranial progression, which is the top line result. Other secondary endpoints are currently being evaluated and we look forward to reporting those out shortly.
The ASCO Post Staff
Jean-Marc Classe, MD, PhD, of France’s Nantes Université, discusses phase III results showing that systematic lymphadenectomy should be omitted in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes, as well as those undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval complete surgery (LBA5505).
The ASCO Post Staff
David J. Andorsky, MD, of the Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers, discusses EPCORE NHL-6, an ongoing study of patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL). As outpatients, the study participants were given subcutaneous epcoritamab-bysp to see whether they could be safely monitored and cytokine-release syndrome appropriately managed in the outpatient setting (Abstract 7029).
The ASCO Post Staff
Christos Kyriakopoulos, MD, of the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, discusses data suggesting that adding cabazitaxel to abiraterone and prednisone improves progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who previously received chemohormonal therapy with docetaxel for hormone-sensitive disease compared with abiraterone plus prednisone alone (Abstract LBA5000).
The ASCO Post Staff
Alicia Morgans, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Karim Fizazi, MD, PhD, of Institut Gustave Roussy and the University of Paris-Saclay, discuss a second interim analysis of the health-related quality of life and pain outcomes in the PSMAfore study (Abstract 5003).
The ASCO Post Staff
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 gene‐expression signatures for tumor‐induced proliferation, PD‐L1 status, or the mutation status of RCC driver genes.