Eflapegrastim, a novel, long-acting GCSF for reducing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: Integrated results from two phase III trials in breast cancer patients.

Authors

Lee Schwartzberg

Lee S. Schwartzberg

West Cancer Center, Germantown, TN

Lee S. Schwartzberg, Gajanan Bhat, Jayaram S. Bharadwaj, Osama Hlalah, Alvaro Restrepo, Inderjit Mehmi, Shanta Chawla, Patrick Wayne Cobb

Organizations

West Cancer Center, Germantown, TN, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Irvine, CA, Pacific Cancer Medical Center, Anaheim, CA, Bond Clinic PA, Winter Haven, FL, Texas Onc PA, McAllen, TX, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Simi Valley, CA, Frontier Cancer Center, Billings, MT

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
Spectrum Pharmaceuticals
Background: Eflapegrastim (E) is a novel, long-acting GCSF comprised of recombinant human GCSF covalently linked to human IgG4 Fc fragment via a PEG linker (MW, 72 kDa). E showed increased potency vs pegfilgrastim (P) in preclinical and Phase I and II trials. Two identically designed Phase III pivotal trials (NCT02643420, NCT02953340) were conducted globally with a fixed dose of 13.2 mg E containing 3.6 mg GCSF to evaluate E vs P (6 mg) in pts receiving chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. Methods: Each open-label trial randomized pts 1:1 to a single subcutaneous dose of E 13.2 mg/0.6 mL or P 6 mg/0.6 mL on Day 2 of each of four 21-day cycles following Day 1 adj/neoadj docetaxel 75 mg/m2 + cyclophosphamide 600mg/m2 (TC) . The primary endpoint was to demonstrate E non-inferiority (NI) to P as measured by mean duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in Cycle 1. Results: A total 643 intent-to-treat pts (314 E/329 P) with median age 60 yrs (24–88) were enrolled. Cycle 1 mean (SD) DSN was 0.24 (0.581) vs 0.36 (0.789) days for E and P, confirming NI (p<.0001) and suggesting statistical superiority (p<.029). DSN NI was also shown across cycles 2–4. Among subgroups, including elderly (≥65 yrs) and overweight (>75kg) pts, DSN was reduced for E vs P. In Cycle 1, E showed an absolute risk reduction for severe neutropenia of 6.5% vs P (27.1% relative risk reduction, p<.043). Neutropenic complications (hospitalization and/or anti-infective use) were 2.9% and 4.0% for E and P (p=ns) in Cycle 1. Incidence of FN was low for both E and P, 1.6% vs 1.8% in Cycle 1 and 3.2% vs 3.0% overall. ANC profiles showed sustained increased levels for E vs P in the recovery phase across all cycles. Safety profiles including events of special interest, irrespective of grade, were mostly similar for E and P. The most common ≥ Grade 3 adverse events were hematologic due to chemotherapy. Conclusions: These integrated pivotal trial results confirm a similar safety profile and non-inferiority in reducing neutropenic risk for E at a lower GCSF dose vs P. The data also suggests the potential for increased potency of E to deliver improved clinical benefit, a possibility that warrants further clinical trials.

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 Details

Meeting

2019 Supportive Care in Oncology Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A

Track

Advance Care Planning,End-of-Life Care,Communication and Shared Decision Making,Integration and Delivery of Palliative and Supportive Care,Coordination and Continuity of Care,Caregiver Support,Biology of Symptoms and Treatment Toxicities,Disparities in Supportive Care

Sub Track

Integration and Delivery of Palliative and Supportive Care

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT02643420 and NCT02953340

Citation

J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl 31; abstr 61)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2019.37.31_suppl.61

Abstract #

61

Poster Bd #

F4

Abstract Disclosures