Results from TreeTopp: A randomized phase II study of the efficacy and safety of varlitinib plus capecitabine versus placebo in second-line (2L) advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC).

Authors

null

Milind M. Javle

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

Milind M. Javle , Do-Youn Oh , Masafumi Ikeda , Wei-Peng Yong , Nicola McIntyre , Bertil Lindmark , Mark McHale

Organizations

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, Singapore, ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, Singapore, Singapore, Aslan Pharmaceuticals, Singapore, Singapore

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
ASLAN Pharmaceuticals

Background: Patients with advanced or metastatic BTC who progress on first-line (1L) gemcitabine-based doublet chemotherapy have few 2L treatment options. Varlitinib is a reversible small molecule pan human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) inhibitor with low nanomolar potency against HER1 (EGFR), HER2 and HER4 with promising early results in advanced BTC. Methods: TreeTopp (NCT03093870) was a global, multicenter, double blind phase 2 study in which patients with advanced BTC who progressed after 1L therapy that included ≥6 doses of gemcitabine, with radiographically measurable disease based on RECIST v1.1, ECOG PS 0 or 1 and albumin ≥3 g/dL were randomized (1:1) to varlitinib (300 mg BID) plus capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 BID 14 days on/ 7 off)(V+C) or placebo plus capecitabine (P+C). The dual primary endpoints were Objective Response Rate (ORR) and Progression Free Survival (PFS) defined as the time from randomization to radiological progression assessed by Independent Central Review. Secondary end points included Overall Survival (OS). Results: Overall, 127 patients were randomized (V+C, n = 64; P+C, n = 63) from May−Dec 2018 and demographics/baseline characteristics were generally well balanced, although the V+C arm had a lower proportion of females vs. P+C (31% vs. 48%). The odds ratio for ORR was numerically higher with V+C vs. P+C was 2.278 (9.4% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.42), the HR for PFS for V+C vs. P+C was 0.90 (median PFS, 2.8 vs. 2.8 months; p = 0.63), and the HR for OS for P+C vs. V+C was 1.11 (median OS, 7.8 vs. 7.5 months; p = 0.66). Although not powered to evaluate sub-group interactions, in sub-group analysis, V+C showed PFS benefit versus P+C in two sub-groups; gallbladder cancer (GBC, HR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.25, 1.22; median PFS, 2.9 vs. 1.6 months) and females (HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.28, 1.23; median PFS, 4.1 vs. 2.8 months). There was no PFS benefit for V+C vs. P+C among males and non-GBC. Toxicities were generally balanced between arms apart from a slightly higher incidence of hyperbilirubinemia, diarrhea and fatigue in the V+C vs. P+C arm. Grade 3/4 toxicities were reported in 66% and 59% of patients in the V+C and P+C arms, respectively. Conclusions: V+C is well tolerated but did not improve ORR, PFS or OS vs. P+C in 2L advanced BTC. Exploratory analyses suggested that patients with GBC and female patients achieved comparatively higher median PFS with V+C vs. P+C. Clinical trial information: NCT03093870.

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

2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Sub Track

Hepatobiliary Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03093870

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38: 2020 (suppl; abstr 4597)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.4597

Abstract #

4597

Poster Bd #

205

Abstract Disclosures