Tislelizumab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC, RATIONALE 302): Impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Authors

Eric Van Cutsem

Eric Van Cutsem

University Hospitals Gasthuisberg, Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Eric Van Cutsem , Ken Kato , Jaffer A. Ajani , Lin Shen , Tianyu Xia , Ningning Ding , Lin Zhan , Gisoo Barnes , Sung-Bae Kim

Organizations

University Hospitals Gasthuisberg, Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China, BeiGene, Inc., Cambridge, MA, BeiGene, Ltd., Zhongguancun Life Science Park, Beijing, China, BeiGene, Inc., San Mateo, CA, Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: RATIONALE 302 was a global phase 3 study (NCT03430843) that investigated tislelizumab (TIS) compared with investigator-chosen chemotherapy (ICC) as second-line treatment for patients (pts) with advanced or metastatic ESCC, in which TIS demonstrated a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival hazard ratio (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.57–0.85], P=0.0001), and a favorable safety profile compared with ICC. Here we assess the HRQoL of pts receiving TIS vs ICC in a pt population that usually experiences HRQoL deterioration. Methods: Adults with advanced or metastatic ESCC whose disease progressed following prior systemic therapy were randomized 1:1 to either TIS 200 mg IV every 3 weeks or ICC (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan). HRQoL was measured using the global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL), physical functioning, and fatigue scores from EORTC QLQ-C30 and the dysphagia, reflux, eating, and pain scores from the EORTC QLQ-OES18 from screening through Cycle 6 or until treatment discontinuation (whichever occurs first). Least-squares mean score change from baseline to Cycles 4 and 6 in HRQoL scores was assessed using a mixed model for repeated measurements. Time to deterioration (TTD) for the GHS/QoL score and the symptom scales of the QLQ-OES18 was examined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Overall, 512 pts (median age 62) were randomized to TIS (n=256) or ICC (n=256). Compared with ICC, TIS-treated pts had stable GHS/QoL and fatigue scores as well as less decline in physical functioning at Cycles 4 and 6 (table). Except for pain, the TIS arm experienced less OES18 symptoms relative to baseline than the ICC arm. TTD analysis showed pts in TIS arm were at lower risk of worsening dysphagia (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.53, 1.07], P=0.0562) compared with ICC. Conclusions: The analysis showed that ESCC pts treated with TIS in the second line had a longer maintenance of HRQoL compared to pts treated with ICC. These results, along with improved survival and favorable safety profile, suggest TIS represents a potential new second-line treatment option for pts with advanced or metastatic ESCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03430843.

Least-square mean change (95% CI) from baseline to cycles 4 and 6.


Tislelizumab
(N=256)
ICC
(N=256)
Cycle 4
Cycle 6
Cycle 4
Cycle 6
QLQ-C30
GHS/QoL
0.0 (-2.5, 2.4)
-0.8 (-3.5, 2.0)
-5.8 (-8.8, -2.8)
-8.9 (-12.8, -4.9)
Physical functioning
-4.0 (-6.3, -1.8)
-4.6 (-7.1, -2.1)
-6.6 (-9.3, -4.0)
-8.9 (-12.1, -5.6)
Fatigue
3.5 (0.4, 6.6)
1.0 (-2.1, 4.2)
11.3 (7.5, 15.1)
6.4 (2.0, 10.9)
QLQ-OES18
Dysphagia
2.7 (-1.7, 7.1)
1.6 (-3.5, 6.6)
7.7 (2.2, 13.2)
1.9 (-5.5, 9.2)
Reflux
-2.3 (-4.6, -0.1)
-1.8 (-4.7, 1.2)
1.8 (-1.1, 4.7)
-1.1 (-5.4, 3.2)
Eating
0.0 (-2.8, 2.8)
-0.5 (-3.6, 2.6)
2.7 (-0.8, 6.2)
4.7 (0.3, 9.1)
Pain
-1.6 (-3.4, 0.2)
-1.4 (-3.9, 1.0)
-1.1 (-3.6, 1.3)
0.2 (-3.6, 4.1)

ICC, investigator-chosen chemotherapy

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

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Sub Track

Esophageal or Gastric Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03430843

Citation

J Clin Oncol 40, 2022 (suppl 16; abstr e16095)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.e16095

Abstract #

e16095

Abstract Disclosures