Advertisement


Pierfranco Conte, MD, on Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Trial Update on Avelumab as Adjuvant Treatment

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Pierfranco Conte, MD, of the University of Padua, discusses phase III findings from the A-BRAVE trial, which was designed to evaluate the efficacy of avelumab, an anti–PD-L1 antibody, as adjuvant treatment for patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer who are at high risk (LBA500).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
The A-BRAVE trial was an academic driven trial conducted in patients at high risk with early triple negative breast cancer. The purpose of the study was to improve the prognosis of these patients by selecting subgroup of patients at particularly high risk of relapse. In the study, we have randomized two strata of patients. One was patients who went to surgery upfront, and after surgery had a diagnosis of advanced stages of disease, high positivity, axillary lymph load, large tumor size. The second stratum were the patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and had surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, still had invasive residual disease in the breast and/or in the axillary lymph nodes. The primary end points of the study were disease-free survival in the entire study population, and the disease-free survival in the post-neoadjuvant group, which included 82% of a total population. We didn't meet the primary end points, because we did observe a difference in favor of avelumab in disease-free survival, a 5% improvement at three years in disease-free survival in the whole population, and a 6% improvement in the post-neoadjuvant population. But this was not statistically significant, hazard ratio was 0.8, p-value 0.17. We did observe on the contrary, a statistically significant difference in overall survival in the entire study. Population at three years the advantage in overall survival for Avelumab was 8.5%, the hazard ratio 0.66, which means a 34% reduction in the risk of death, the p-value 0.035. We did also perform a postdoc exploratory analysis, try to understand why we are seeing a larger benefit in overall survival than disease-free survival, and the analysis was on distant disease-free survival. And again, we did observe a significant advantage for Avelumab, 7.5% improvement at three years in distant disease-free survival, hazard ratio 0.7, p-value 0.027. We do know that in many countries today standard of care for high-risk, early triple negative disease is neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus Pembrolizumab. So Pembrolizumab is given to all these patients before surgery, and also is continued after surgery, independently from the pathological response observed at surgery. And this is, as I said before, standard recommended by international and also national guidelines in Italy. There are aware still patients who do not receive Pembro if a neoadjuvant situation. Patients who have a smaller tumor size, clinically negative axillary lymph nodes, patients for whom physicians may, or might, have some concern about the tolerability of a treatment. So there are still patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy without Pembro. Many of these patients fortunately receive a pathological [inaudible 00:04:00] response, but still some of them, 40 to 50%, have residual invasive disease, and they think that for these patients avelumab will be a good option. Highly effective in terms of distant disease-free survival, effective in terms of overall survival, and also tolerability was quite good. Now of course, this is the first presentation of the study, because the study was an event-driven study. We will follow up the patients longer, by sure. And there are many translational studies ongoing, because we have collected tumor samples, blood, plasma, and feces by all these patients. So, we will have a lot of translational research trying to understand who are the patients who benefit more, and who are the patients who unfortunately still relapse in spite of avelumab?

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).

Lymphoma

Yasmin H. Karimi, MD, on Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Follow-up on Subcutaneous Epcoritamab Monotherapy

Yasmin H. Karimi, MD, of the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses 2.5-year follow-up data on epcoritamab monotherapy for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. The subcutaneous regimen continues to demonstrate durable responses (Abstract 7039).

Skin Cancer

Pauline Funchain, MD and Paolo A. Ascierto, MD, on Advanced Melanoma: Results From the RELATIVITY-048 Trial

Pauline Funchain, MD, of Stanford University and the Stanford Cancer Institute, and Paolo A. Ascierto, MD, of Italy’s Istituto Nazionale Tumori and IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, discuss efficacy and safety findings of the triplet therapy nivolumab, relatlimab-rmbw, and ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma (Abstract 9504).

 

Breast Cancer

Sherene Loi, MD, PhD, on Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Weighing the Prognostic Value of ctDNA Detection

Sherene Loi, MD, PhD, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, discusses a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis from a cohort of patients with early-stage breast cancer who were enrolled in the monarchE trial. This large cohort was studied to look at the usefulness of a personalized tumor-informed assay for ctDNA detection in early stage high-risk patients (LBA507).

Gastroesophageal Cancer

Jens Marquardt, MD, and Jens Hoeppner, MD, on Esophageal Cancer: Phase III Findings on Chemotherapy vs Chemoradiation

Jens Marquardt, MD, of the University of Lübeck, and Jens Hoeppner, MD, of the University of Bielefeld, discuss findings from the ESOPEC trial, which showed that perioperative chemotherapy (fluorouracii, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel) and surgery improves survival in patients with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma when compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (41.4 Gy plus carboplatin and paclitaxel) followed by surgery (LBA1).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement