Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland
Jacek Jassem , Roy S. Herbst , Filippo de Marinis , Jacques Cadranel , Tibor Csőszi , Dolores Isla , Gongyan Chen , Konstantinos N. Syrigos , Diego Cortinovis , Toyoaki Hida , Simonetta Mocci , See Phan , Ida Enquist , Hina Patel , Monette Villalobos , Xiaohui Wen , Yu Deng , Hiroshi Kuriki , David R. Spigel , Giuseppe Giaccone
Background: IMpower110 evaluated atezo mono in PD-L1–selected, chemo-naive patients (pts) with nonsquamous (nsq) or squamous (sq) NSCLC. At the interim analysis, IMpower110 met its primary OS endpoint, with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement for atezo vs chemo in TC3 or IC3 wild-type (EGFR/ALK-negative) pts. We report on the safety profile of atezo vs chemo in IMpower110. Methods: 572 pts with stage IV nsq or sq NSCLC, PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% on TC or IC and ECOG PS 0-1 were randomized 1:1 to receive atezo (1200 mg IV q3w) or chemo (4 or 6 21-day cycles). In the chemo arm, nsq pts received cisplatin (cis) 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin (carbo) AUC 6 + pemetrexed (pem) 500 mg/m2 IV q3w; sq pts received cis 75 mg/m2 + gemcitabine (gem) 1250 mg/m2 or carbo AUC 5 + gem 1000 mg/m2 IV q3w. Safety was assessed in all treated pts (safety evaluable [SE] population [pop]), regardless of PD-L1 expression or EGFR/ALK status. AEs were summarized per MedDRA v22.0 and severity graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Immune-mediated AEs (imAEs) were defined per a sponsor-specified list of terms, regardless of whether the events led to systemic glucocorticoid, endocrine therapy, or other immunosuppressants use. Results: At data cutoff (Sep 10, 2018) within the ITT pop, treatment (tx) was ongoing in 90 (atezo: 31.6%) and 25 (chemo: 8.7%) pts, with 13.7 mo of follow-up. Within the SE pop (atezo: n = 286, chemo: n = 263), atezo pts had longer tx exposure (5.3 mo) vs chemo pts (pem, 3.5 mo; gem, 2.6 mo; carbo, 2.3 mo; cis, 2.1 mo). Atezo had a favorable safety profile vs chemo (table); safety data were consistent with data from a pooled atezo mono pop. imAEs occurred in 40.2% (atezo) and 16.7% (chemo) of pts and were Grade (Gr) 3-4 in 6.6% and 1.5%, respectively. Conclusions: Atezo was better tolerated than chemo and imAEs were generally low grade. Overall, the safety experience with atezo mono in IMpower110 was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT02409342
n (%) | Atezo N = 286 | Chemo N = 263 | Atezo mono pooleda N = 3178 |
---|---|---|---|
Gr 3-4 AEb | 86 (30.1) | 138 (52.5) | 1482 (46.6) |
Related Gr 3-4 AEb | 37 (12.9) | 116 (44.1) | 496 (15.6) |
Gr 5 AE | 11 (3.8) | 11 (4.2) | 119 (3.7) |
Related Gr 5 AE | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 11 (0.3) |
AE leading to any tx withdrawal | 18 (6.3) | 43 (16.3) | 226 (7.1) |
imAE | 115 (40.2) | 44 (16.7) | 1097 (34.5) |
Gr 3-4 imAEb | 19 (6.6) | 4 (1.5) | 248 (7.8) |
imAE requiring corticosteroids use | 30 (10.5) | 3 (1.1) | 247 (7.8) |
a Pooled atezo mono-treated pts (cross indications and therapy lines).
b Gr 3-4 AE/imAE: number of pts whose highest grades of AE/imAE are 3 or 4
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: Yuming Zhu
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Rita Migliorino