Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
David Chan , Emily K. Bergsland , Jennifer A. Chan , Rujuta Gadgil , Thorvardur Ragnar Halfdanarson , Kathleen Hornbacker , Virginia Kelly , Pamela L. Kunz , Patrick Walsh McGarrah , Nitya Prabhakar Raj , Diane Lauren Reidy , Alia Thawer , Julia Whitman , Linda Wu , Simron Singh
Background: G3 NENs are aggressive, and optimal systemic treatment is unclear. Temozolomide (TEM)-based regimens have been used to treat grade 1-2 NETs, but their efficacy in G3 NENs (Ki-67 > 20%) remains undetermined. Aims: To assess the clinical efficacy of TEM-containing regimens in advanced grade III gastroenteropancreatic NENs (GEPNENs). Methods: A multicentre retrospective review (2008-2017) of patients with metastatic/unresectable G3 GEPNENs who received a TEM-containing regimen. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Radiologic response was extracted from local reports without formal RECIST criteria. Results: 118 patients in six centers were included (median age 55, 65% male, 15% functional, 75% pancreatic NEN). 57% were well-differentiated, 35% poorly-differentiated, and 18% unknown based on local pathology reports. The regimen used was CAPTEM in 93% and TEM in 7%. Best radiological responses were: complete response (1%), partial response (39%), stable disease (22%), progressive disease (31%), unknown (7%) not by RECIST. Median TTF was 150 days and median overall survival (OS) 18.0 months. Fifteen patients (14%) required dose reductions/discontinuation due to adverse events. TTF was shorter for patients on TEM alone (p = 0.02, Table 1). Well-differentiated NENs had better response rate (52% vs 26%, p = 0.02) and overall survival (30.1 vs 12.0 mo, p = 0.008) compared to poorly-differentiated NEN. Conclusions: This is the largest TEM treatment series in G3 NEN, involving collaboration of several major North American NET centers. 40% of patients showed some degree of response, and treatment was generally well-tolerated. TEM-based regimens should be considered a viable treatment option in this setting. Prospective confirmatory trials (such as EA2142) may face difficulties in accrual due to disease rarity.
TTF (log-rank test) | Response rate (chi-squared test) | OS from start of TEM (log-rank test) | |
---|---|---|---|
Regimen (CAPTEM vs TEM) | 5.7 mo vs 1.0 mo, p = 0.02 | 45% vs 25%, p = 0.28 | 18.0 mo vs 15.2 mo, p = 0.91 |
Primary (pNEN vs non-pNEN) | 5.8 mo vs 2.1 mo, p = 0.38 | 46% vs 35%, p = 0.36 | 20.4 mo vs 13.1 mo, p = 0.10 |
Differentiation (well-diff vs poorly-diff) | 5.8 mo v 2.1 mo, p = 0.37 | 52% v 26%, p = 0.02 | 30.1 mo vs 12.8 mo, p = 0.008 |
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Nick Pavlakis
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Dwight Hall Owen
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Jennifer Rachel Eads
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Pamela L. Kunz