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

Breast Cancer

Reshma Jagsi, MD, and Christian F. Singer, MD, MPH, on Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Adding a Vaccine to Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy

Reshma Jagsi, MD, DPhil, of Emory University Winship Cancer Institute, and Christian F. Singer, MD, MPH, of the Medical University of Vienna, discuss the MUC-1 vaccine tecemotide. When added to standard neoadjuvant systemic therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer, this vaccine improved distant relapse–free and overall survival rates. Despite the exploratory nature of this observation, says Dr. Singer, this is the first long-term survival benefit of an anticancer vaccine in breast disease reported to date (Abstract 587).

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).

Gynecologic Cancers

Don S. Dizon, MD, on Ovarian and Other Extrarenal Clear Cell Carcinomas: Update on Nivolumab and Ipilimumab

Don S. Dizon, MD, of Legorreta Cancer Center at Brown University and Lifespan Cancer Institute, discusses final phase II results of the BrUOG 354 trial showing that, for patients with ovarian and other extrarenal clear cell cancers, nivolumab and ipilimumab warrant further evaluation against standard treatment, given the historically chemotherapy-resistant nature of the disease (LBA5500).

Breast Cancer

Milana Bergamino Sirvén, MD, PhD, on HER2-Positive Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Molecular Profiling, Prognosis, and Treatment Options

Milana Bergamino Sirvén, MD, PhD, of Spain’s Institute of Cancer Research, discusses her findings on molecular profiling of patients with estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-positive early-stage breast tumors after short-term preoperative endocrine therapy. This study suggests that such profiling may help clinicians identify those patients with a favorable prognosis for adjuvant endocrine therapy and those who may require additional treatment (Abstract 560).

Skin Cancer

Christian U. Blank, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: Potentially Practice-Changing Results From the NADINA Trial

Christian U. Blank, MD, PhD, of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses findings of an investigator-initiated phase III trial showing that neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab followed by response-driven adjuvant treatment improved event-free survival in patients with macroscopic, resectable stage III melanoma compared with adjuvant nivolumab (LBA2)

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement