Advertisement


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

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

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.

Related Videos

Prostate Cancer
Genomics/Genetics

Alicia Morgans, MD, MPH, and Susan Halabi, PhD, on Prostate Cancer: New Findings on Classifying Patients Into Risk Groups

Alicia Morgans, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Susan Halabi, PhD, of the Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University School of Medicine, discuss a clinical-genetic model that identified novel circulating tumor DNA alterations that are prognostic of overall survival and may help to classify patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer into risk groups useful for selecting trial participants (Abstract 5007).

Palliative Care

Joseph A. Greer, PhD, on Lung Cancer: Telehealth vs In-Person Palliative Care

Joseph A. Greer, PhD, of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, discusses study findings showing the merits of delivering early palliative care via telehealth vs in person to patients with advanced lung cancer. Using telemedicine in this way may potentially improve access to and more broadly disseminate this evidence-based care model (LBA3).

Leukemia
Lymphoma

William G. Wierda, MD, PhD, on CLL/SLL: Updated Findings on Ibrutinib and Venetoclax

William G. Wierda, MD, PhD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses up to 5.5 years of follow-up data from the phase II CAPTIVATE study, showing that in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), fixed duration ibrutinib plus venetoclax continues to provide clinically meaningful progression-free disease in those with high-risk genomic features as well as in the overall population (Abstract 7009).

Leukemia

Mazyar Shadman, MD, MPH, on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Recruiting for the CELESTIAL-TNCLL Study

Mazyar Shadman, MD, MPH, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, discusses an ongoing phase III study of the BCL2 inhibitor sonrotoclax plus zanubrutinib vs venetoclax and obinutuzumab for patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The investigators are recruiting internationally (see NCT06073821; Abstract TPS7087).

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