Kindai University Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Kazuhiko Nakagawa , Edward B. Garon , Takashi Seto , Makoto Nishio , Santiago Ponce Aix , Chao-Hua Chiu , Keunchil Park , Silvia Novello , Ernest Nadal , Fumio Imamura , Kiyotaka Yoh , Jin-Yuan Shih , Kwok Hung Au , Denis Moro-Sibilot , Sotaro Enatsu , Annamaria H. Zimmermann , Bente Frimodt-Moller , Carla M. Visseren Grul , Martin Reck
Background: Dual blockade of EGFR and VEGFR pathways in EGFRm NSCLC augments anti-tumor efficacy versus (v) EGFR inhibition alone. RELAY (NCT02411448) evaluated efficacy and safety of ERL, an EGFR TKI standard-of-care, plus RAM, a human IgG1 VEGFR2 antagonist, or PL in 1L EGFRm metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Eligibility included untreated metastatic NSCLC pts with Exon 19 deletion (del) or L858R and no CNS metastasis. Randomized (1:1) pts received ERL (150 mg/day) + RAM (10 mg/kg q2w) or ERL + PL, stratified by gender, geographic region (East Asia v other), EGFRm type (Ex19del v L858R) and EGFR testing method (Therascreen/Cobas v other). The primary endpoint was Investigator assessed progression free survival (PFS). Other objectives included ORR, DoR, PFS2, OS, safety, and plasma T790M mutation (Guardant NGS). Results: 449 pts were randomized characteristics were balanced between treatment arms: Asian 77%, Females 63%, Ex19del 54%. RAM + ERL significantly prolonged PFS, DoR, and PFS2 (Table). Grade >=3 TEAEs were greater with RAM (72%) v PL (54%), largely driven by hypertension (24 v 5%, no Gr4); with 1 treatment related on study death (hemothorax) in RAM v 0 PL. EGFR T790M+ rates at progression are forthcoming. Conclusion: RAM + ERL led to superior PFS in 1L EGFRm metastatic NSCLC. Safety was consistent with the established safety profiles of the individual compounds. Clinical trial information: NCT02411448
RAM + ERL (n=224) | PL + ERL (n=225) | HR (95% CI) | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
PFS | 0.591 (0.461 – 0.760) | <0.0001 | ||
Median, months (95% CI) | 19.4 (15.4 – 21.6) | 12.4 (11.0 – 13.5) | ||
Censoring rate | 46% | 30% | ||
ORR, % (95% CI) | 76.3 (70.8 – 81.9) | 74.7 (69.0 – 80.3) | 0.7413 | |
Number of responders | 171 | 168 | ||
DoR** | 0.619 (0.477 – 0.805)* | 0.0003* | ||
Median, months (95% CI) | 18.0 (13.9 – 19.8) | 11.1 (9.7 – 12.3) | ||
Censoring rate | 41% | 24% | ||
PFS2 | 0.690 (0.490 – 0.972) | 0.0325 | ||
Median, months (95% CI) | NR | NR | ||
Censoring rate | 73% | 65% | ||
Interim OS | 0.832 (0.532 – 1.303) | 0.4209 | ||
Median, months (95% CI) | NR | NR | ||
Censoring rate | 83% | 81% |
Median follow-up: 20.7 months NR, not reached * unstratified **Ns are based on number of responders from the ITT population
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
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Helena Alexandra Yu
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Min Hee Hong
2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program
First Author: Kazuto Nishio