Efficacy of next line of therapy after treatment with lenvatinib (LEN) in combination with pembrolizumab (pembro) versus treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with advanced endometrial cancer (aEC): Exploratory analysis of Study 309/KEYNOTE-775.

Authors

null

Vicky Makker

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY

Vicky Makker , Nicoletta Colombo , Alessandro Santin , David Scott Miller , Keiichi Fujiwara , Sandro Pignata , Isabelle Laure Ray-Coquard , Yong Man Kim , Eva M. Guerra , Jie Huang , Gianmaria Barresi , Jodi McKenzie , Domenica Lorusso

Organizations

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, University of Milan-Bicocca, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Japan, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Napoli, Italy, Centre Léon Bérard, University Claude Bernard, Lyon, France, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan, Seoul, South Korea, Hospital Universitario Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, Spain, Eisai Inc., Nutley, NJ, MSD Austria, Vienna, NJ, Austria, Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: In the multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 Study 309/KEYNOTE-775, LEN + pembro had significant PFS and overall survival benefits, and improved objective response rate vs TPC in pts with aEC following systemic platinum-based treatment (Makker 2022, NEJM). These results were seen in all-comer pts and in pts with DNA mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) disease. Here, we assessed PFS on next line of therapy (PFS2) of each arm. Methods: Pts with aEC and 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy regimen (or up to 2 if 1 was given in neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting) were randomized (1:1) to receive LEN 20 mg orally QD + pembro 200 mg IV Q3W or TPC (doxorubicin at 60 mg/m2 IV Q3W or paclitaxel at 80 mg/m2 IV QW [3 weeks on; 1 week off]). Randomization was stratified by MMR status (determined centrally); pts with pMMR tumors were further stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, geographic region, and history of pelvic radiation. In this prespecified exploratory analysis, PFS2 (defined as the time from randomization to disease progression on next line of treatment or death, whichever came first) was analyzed per investigator assessment in the pMMR and all-comer populations. Results: 827 Pts (pMMR, n=697; MMR deficient [dMMR], n=130) were randomized to LEN + pembro (n=411) or TPC (n=416). At data cutoff (October 26, 2020), 567 pts (LEN + pembro, n=282; TPC, n=285) had discontinued study treatment and 315 (LEN + pembro, n=115; TPC, n=200) had received a subsequent systemic anticancer therapy (Table): most commonly doxorubicin (n=58) in the LEN + pembro arm and paclitaxel (n=57) in the TPC arm. Median PFS2 was longer in the LEN + pembro arm vs the TPC arm in the pMMR population (14.4 vs 9.8 mo; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50–0.75) and in the all-comer population (16.0 vs 9.5 mo; HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46–0.67). Additionally, the PFS2 rate at 6 months favored LEN + pembro vs TPC in the pMMR population (82.0% vs 74.8%) and in the all-comer population (81.7% vs 72.5%). Conclusions: Clinically meaningful improvements in PFS2 were seen in the LEN + pembro group compared with TPC in pMMR and all-comer pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03517449.

pMMR
All-comers

LEN + pembro
(n = 346)
TPC
(n = 351)
LEN + pembro
(n = 411)
TPC
(n = 416)
Subsequent anticancer therapy, n (%)
109 (31.5)
176 (50.1)
115 (28.0)
200 (48.1)
Chemotherapy
92 (26.6)
119 (33.9)
97 (23.6)
129 (31.0)
VEGF/VEGFR inhibitor
10 (2.9)
43 (12.3)
10 (2.4)
46 (11.1)
PD1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor
4 (1.2)
42 (12.0)
4 (1.0)
53 (12.7)
2 Subsequent therapy lines
81 (23.4)
134 (38.2)
85 (20.7)
152 (36.5)
≥3 Subsequent therapy lines
55 (15.9)
78 (22.2)
58 (14.1)
85 (20.4)
Median PFS2, mo (95% CI)
14.4 (12.1-17.3)9.8 (8.7-11.1)16.0 (13.0–19.5)
9.5 (8.6–10.7)
PFS2 HR (95% CI); P-value
0.62 (0.50–0.75); <0.0001
0.56 (0.46–0.67); <0.0001

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

Poster Session

Session Title

Gynecologic Cancer

Track

Gynecologic Cancer

Sub Track

Uterine Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03517449

Citation

J Clin Oncol 40, 2022 (suppl 16; abstr 5587)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.5587

Abstract #

5587

Poster Bd #

463

Abstract Disclosures