Northern Cancer Institute, St Leonards, Sydney, Australia
Nick Pavlakis , David Turner Ransom , David Wyld , Katrin Marie Sjoquist , Rebecca Asher , Val Gebski , Kate Wilson , Andrew Ddembe Kiberu , Matthew E. Burge , William Macdonald , Paul Roach , David A. Pattison , Patrick Butler , Timothy Jay Price , Michael Michael , Benjamin James Lawrence , Dale L. Bailey , Simone Leyden , John Raymond Zalcberg , J. Harvey Turner
Background: CAPTEM is an accepted regimen for patients (pts) with advanced pNETs. Single agent 177Lu-Octreotate PRRT is now a standard of care for progressive WHO Grade (G) 1/2 mNETs. High activity was seen with LuTate/CAPTEM in a single arm Phase I/II trial. This study was undertaken to determine the relative activity of adding CAPTEM to LuTate PRRT in pts with mNETs and pNETs. Methods: Non-comparative randomised open label parallel group phase II trial with 2:1 randomisation to PRRT/CAPTEM (experimental arm) vs. PRRT (mNETs control) and CAPTEM (pNETS control). PRRT/CAPTEM: 7.8GBq LuTate day(D) 10, 8 weekly (wkly) x 4, with b.i.d. oral CAP 750mg/m2 D1-14 & TEM 75mg/m2D10-14, 8 wkly x 4; PRRT: 8 wkly x 4; CAPTEM 8 wkly x 4. Primary endpoint: Progression free survival (PFS). mNETS- at 15 months (mo) assuming 15mo PFS 66.4% in control arm, aiming for PFS ³ 80%; pNETS- at 12mo assuming 12mo PFS 60% in control arm, aiming for PFS ³ 75%. Secondary endpoints: Objective tumour response rate (complete or partial) (OTRR), clinical benefit rate (OTRR, stable disease) (CBR), toxicity, quality of life. Results: 75 pts enrolled (Dec 2015 – Nov 2018): mNETs 33 PRRT/CAPTEM and 14 PRRT; pNETS 19 PRRT/CAPTEM and 9 CAPTEM. mNETS: Median follow-up 35mo; 15mo PFS was 90% (95% CI: 73-97%) v 92% (95% CI: 57-99%); OTRR 31% vs 15%; and CBR 97% vs 92% for PRRT/CAPTEM v PRRT respectively. Treatment related adverse events (AEs): 24/32 PRRT/CAPTEM pts had at least one G3 event (75%) vs 5/13 (38%, PRRT); and 4/32 pts at least one G4 event (13%) v 1/13 (8%) respectively, mostly haematologic (haem). Only one patient failed to complete therapy (PRRT/CAPTEM). pNETS: Median follow-up 34mo; 12mo PFS was 76% (95% CI: 48-90%) v 67% (95% CI: 28-88%); OTRR 68% vs 33%; and CBR 100% vs 100% for PRRT/CAPTEM v CAPTEM respectively. Treatment related AEs: 5/18 PRRT/CAPTEM pts had at least one G3 event (28%) vs 3/9 (33%) CAPTEM; 3/18 pts at least one G4 event (17%) v 1/9 (11%) respectively. Conclusions: CAPTEM/PRRT is active, meeting its target landmark PFS for CAPTEM/PRRT (12mo pNETs; 15mo mNETs) with numerically greater OTRR in both pNETs and mNETs, but with more haem toxicity in mNETs. As activity was high in both control arms longer follow up is required to determine if the relative activity of PRRT/CAPTEM is sufficient to warrant Phase III evaluation. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12615000909527.
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
2020 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Nick Pavlakis
2020 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Nick Pavlakis
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Jennifer Rachel Eads