PARAMOUNT: phase III study of pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
I I. B.- T R E A T M E N T P L A N: DOCETAXEL 75 mg/m2 40 mg/m2 THORACIC RT (66 Gys: 180 cGy/d) CISPLATIN 40 mg/m2 Days E V A L U A.
Advertisements

C.P. Belani 1, T. Brodowicz 2, P. Peterson 3, W. John 3, G. Scagliotti 4 1 Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA USA; 2 Medical University, Vienna,
Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
Paz-Ares LG et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract CRA7510.
Can we select patients most likely to benefit from pemetrexed continuation maintenance? SEONC00109.
Questions and answers about PARAMOUNT: phase III study of pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC.
Efficacy and Safety of Three Bortezomib-Based Combinations in Elderly, Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: Results from All Randomized Patients.
Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib (E) Alone or in Combination with Carboplatin/Paclitaxel (CP) in Never or Light Former Smokers with Advanced Lung.
Randomized Phase II trial of erlotinib (E) alone or in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel (CP) in never or light former smokers with advanced lung.
Presented by Martin H. Cohen, M.D. at the 27 July 2004 meeting of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee.
Efficacy of Denileukin Diftitox Retreatment in Patients with Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Who Relapsed After Initial Response 1 Identification of an Active,
Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine plus Cetuximab versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Southwest.
First-Line TKI Use in EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC
Phase III study of first-line XELOX plus bevacizumab (BEV) for 6 cycles followed by XELOX plus BEV or single agent (s/a) BEV as maintenance therapy in.
Bevacizumab Update.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase IIIb Trial (ATLAS) Comparing Bevacizumab Therapy with or without Erlotinib, after Completion of Chemotherapy.
1 Phase II trial of sequential gemcitabine and carboplatin followed by paclitaxel as first-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma Presented by.
Effect of Age on Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) Receiving Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone.
Taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC): investigational agents TTP = median time to disease progression OS = median overall survival.
Randomized phase III trial of trabectedin versus doxorubicin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in translocation-related sarcomas (TRS) Sant P. Chawla,
Please note, these are the actual video-recorded proceedings from the live CME event and may include the use of trade names and other raw, unedited content.
ESMO 2011 Lung Cancer AVAPERL Study Authors: Dr. Sunil Verma Date posted: September 28 th, 2011.
Lung cancer perspectives. Targeted therapy : one for all or a few for one ? Miklos Pless, Winterthur
1 SNDA Gemzar plus Carboplatin Treatment of Late Relapsing Ovarian Cancer.
Please note, these are the actual video-recorded proceedings from the live CME event and may include the use of trade names and other raw, unedited content.
NHL13: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Study of Rituximab as Maintenance Treatment versus Observation Alone in Patients with Aggressive B ‐ Cell Lymphoma.
Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.
Gemcitabine + Cisplatin +/- Bevacizumab as 1st-line Treatment of Advanced NSCLC: AVAiL Study Manegold PASCO 25:#7514, 2007/Ann.
Rituximab maintenance for the treatment of indolent NHL Dr Christian Buske.
Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemo-bevacizumab therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized.
Riyaz Shah Kent Oncology Centre Maidstone, UK ErbB family blockade in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC): Latest clinical understanding.
A paradigm shift in the treatment of advanced lung cancer: survival and symptom benefits with Tarceva Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu Cancer Institute Ion Chiricuta.
Final Efficacy Results from OAM4558g, a Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating MetMAb or Placebo in Combination with Erlotinib in Advanced NSCLC Spigel DR.
AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.
OCEANS: A Randomized, Double- Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Trial of Chemotherapy with or without Bevacizumab (BEV) in Patients with Platinum-
Kang Y et al. Proc ASCO 2010;Abstract LBA4007.
Il Paziente senza target
C.P. Belani 1, D.M. Waterhouse 2, H.H. Ghazal 3, S. Ramalingam 4, J.M. Waples 5, R.E. Bordoni 6, G.A. Reznikoff 7, C.P. Curran 8, R. H. Greenberg 9 1 Penn.
CV-1 Trial 709 The ISEL Study (IRESSA ® Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer) Summary of Data as of December 16, 2004 Kevin Carroll, MSc Summary of Data.
Gemcitabine With or Without Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer (ABC): Results of a Multicentre, Randomized Phase III.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results.
1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.
Moskowitz CH et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 673.
Chemoimmunotherapy with Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) versus Bendamustine and Rituximab (BR) in Previously Untreated and.
A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter Study of Eribulin Mesylate versus Capecitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast.
Discussant: M Ducreux, MD, PhD Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif France TH-302 plus Gemcitabine vs. Gemcitabine in Patients with Untreated Advanced Pancreatic.
First line treatment of advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer – a Cochrane Collaboration.
Mok TS, Wu SL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361: Gefitinib Superior.
Erlotinib plus Gemcitabine Compared with Gemcitabine Alone in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the National Cancer Institute.
Weekly Paclitaxel Combined with Monthly Carboplatin versus Single-Agent Therapy in Patients Age 70 to 89: IFCT-0501 Randomized Phase III Study in Advanced.
PARAMOUNT: Phase III Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed (Pem) Plus Best Supportive Care (BSC) Versus Placebo Plus BSC Immediately Following Induction Treatment.
1 LUX-Lung 3 clinical trial ECOG=Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Sequist LV et al. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(27): Treatment-naïve Advanced NSCLC.
Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine and cisplatin vs. gemcitabine alone inpatients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status.
Belani CP et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract CRA8000. (Oral Presentation)
A cura di Filippo de Marinis
Alessandra Gennari, MD PhD
Pazopanib: the role in the treatment of mRCC
LUX-Lung 6 clinical trial
LUX-Lung 3 clinical trial
Maintenance Lapatinib After Chemotherapy in HER1/2-Positive Metastatic Bladder Cancer CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting*
Outcomes of patients in the North Trent region with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with maintenance pemetrexed following induction with platinum.
CCO Independent Conference Coverage
Ruolo di carboplatino + nab-paclitaxel nel trattamento di I linea nel carcinoma polmonare non a piccole cellule         P.Bidoli S.C. Oncologia Medica.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Cost-Effectiveness of Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Nonsquamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer  Robert Klein, MS, Catherine.
Nab-paclitaxel nel NSCLC avanzato
Maintenance paradigm in non-squamous NSCLC
Chapter 3 Treatment guidelines for NSCLC that does not have targetable driver mutations.
1University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium;
Presentation transcript:

PARAMOUNT: phase III study of pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

All Chapters at a glance: please click on box to review Maintenance strategies in non-squamous NSCLC 1 PARAMOUNT: study design and objectives 2 PARAMOUNT: patient & disease characteristics, drug administration 3 PARAMOUNT: PFS results 4 PARAMOUNT: post-discontinuation therapy 5 PARAMOUNT: safety & tolerability 6 PARAMOUNT: conclusions 7

Increase the duration of disease control Objectives of maintenance therapy1 Maintaining tolerability Improve overall survival

Tolerance to maintenance drug is known from induction treatment Maximise the potential of the drug used in 1st-line Potential advantages of continuation maintenance approach2–4 Saves a drug for subsequent treatment lines

PARAMOUNT: pemetrexed/cisplatin followed by pemetrexed for advanced non-squamous* NSCLC1 2:1 randomisation pemetrexed† 500 mg/m2 IV + BSC day 1, q 21 days; n=359 pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 IV + cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1, q 21 days; n=939 Non-squamous* NSCLC patients only CR, PR, or SD after 4 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin n=539 progressive disease placebo† + BSC day 1, q 21 days; n=180 *Adenocarcinoma, large cell carcinoma and other histologies † Vitamin B12, folic acid and dexamethasone given during induction therapy and in both maintenance arms. BSC=Best Supportive Care Patients enrolled if: • non-squamous* NSCLC • no prior systemic treatment for lung cancer • ECOG PS 0/1 Stratified for: • PS (0 vs 1) • disease stage (IIIB vs IV) prior to induction • response to induction (CR/PR vs SD)

PARAMOUNT: study objectives1 • Progression-free survival (PFS) Primary objective Secondary objectives • Overall survival (OS) • Objective tumour response rate (RR) (RECIST 1.0) • Patient-reported outcomes (EQ-5D) • Resource utilisation • Adverse events (AEs)

PARAMOUNT: patient characteristics (randomised patients)1 placebo n=180 Median age, yrs Age <65 yrs Male Caucasian Smoker Ever smoker Never smoker ECOG PS 1 2/3* *Protocol violations 238 (66%) 201 (56%) 339 (94%) 275 (77%) 82 (23%) 115 (32%) 243 (68%) (<1%) 112 (62%) 171 (95%) 144 (80%) 34 (19%) 55 (31%) 123 2 (1%) pemetrexed n=359 61 62 Caucasian 339 (94%) 171 (95%)

PARAMOUNT: disease characteristics (randomised patients)1 placebo n=180 Disease stage IV* Histology Adenocarcinoma/bronchoalveolar Large cell Other non-squamous Best tumour response to induction CR/PR SD PD/Unknown† * Lung Cancer Staging System Version V † Protocol violations pemetrexed n=359 328 310 24 25 166 186 7 (91%) (86%) (7%) (46%) (52%) (2%) 161 160 12 8 76 94 10 (89%) (4%) (42%) (6%) Disease stage IV* 328 (91%) 161 (89%) Adenocarcinoma/bronchoalveolar 310 (86%) 160 (89%)

PARAMOUNT: drug administration (randomised patients)1 Data related to the primary endpoint (PFS) data analysis. Figures are likely to change at the time of the final OS analysis. pemetrexed n=359 placebo n=180 mean # of cycles patients > 6 cycles dose intensity 4.9 4.2 23% 14% 95% n.a.

Induction = 4 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin Pemetrexed continuation maintenance demonstrated significant PFS benefit for patients1 Progression-free survival (%) Time (months) 3 6 9 12 15 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Investigator-assessed PFS Induction = 4 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin NOT reflected in the data endpoints pemetrexed + BSC (n=359) placebo + BSC (n=180) HR=0.62 (95% CI 0.49–0.79); p<0.0001 BSC=Best Supportive Care Median PFS (95% CI) Pemetrexed 4.1 (3.2-4.6) Placebo 2.8 (2.6-3.1) 4.1 2.8 HR 0.62 reduction in the risk of progression 38%

Induction = 4 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin Pemetrexed continuation maintenance demonstrated significant PFS benefit for patients1 Progression-free survival (%) Time (months) 3 6 9 12 15 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Independently reviewed PFS† Induction = 4 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin NOT reflected in the data endpoints pemetrexed + BSC (n=316) placebo + BSC (n=156) HR=0.64 (95% CI 0.51–0.81); p<0.0002 † 88% of patients were independently reviewed (472/539); BSC=Best Supportive Care Median PFS (95% CI) Pemetrexed 3.9 (3.0–4.2) Placebo 2.6 (2.2–2.9) 3.9 2.6 HR 0.64

Progression-free survival HRs in subgroups1 All Stage IIIB IV Induction response CR/PR SD Pre-randomisation ECOG PS 1 Smoking status Non-smoker Smoker Sex Male Female Age (years) <70 ≥70 <65 ≥65 Histology Adenocarcinoma Large Cell Carcinoma Other 0.62 (0.59-0.79) 0.55 (0.24-1.26) 0.62 (0.49-0.80) 0.48 (0.34-0.67) 0.74 (0.53-1.04) 0.53 (0.35-0.79) 0.67 (0.50-0.90) 0.41 (0.24-0.71) 0.70 (0.53-0.90) 0.74 (0.55-1.00) 0.49 (0.34-0.72) 0.69 (0.54-0.90) 0.35 (0.20-0.63) 0.70 (0.53-0.94) 0.51 (0.34-0.75) 0.39 (0.14-1.07) 0.64 (0.22-1.89) 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 0.6 1.4 1.8 Favours pemetrexed Favours placebo 539 50 489 242 280 170 366 116 419 313 226 447 92 350 189 471 36 32 HR (95% CI) N Progression-free survival HRs in subgroups1 PFS results were internally consistent; benefit was seen across all subgroups

PARAMOUNT: median PFS according to response to induction treatment1 Survival time (months) 1 2 3 5 Response to induction treatment Complete/Partial response n=242, HR=0.48, (0.34-0.67) Stable disease n=280, HR=0.74, (0.53-1.04) 4 Numbers in brackets are the 95% CI values. pemetrexed (n=166) pemetrexed (n=186) 4.1 (3.1-6.0) 4.1 (3.0-4.6) placebo (n=76) placebo (n=94) 2.6 (1.6-2.9) 3.0 (2.8-4.1)

PARAMOUNT: post-discontinuation therapy (PDT-eligible patients)1 placebo n=122 78 (64%) 45 (37%) 43 (35%) 4 (3%) 2 (2%) 1 (<1%) 6 (5%) Patients with PDT Drug name Erlotinib Docetaxel Gemcitabine Investigational drug Vinorelbine Bevacizumab Cisplatin Other† p-value 0.35 0.33 0.27 0.15 0.58 1.00 – pemetrexed n=200 116 (58%) 62 (31%) 58 (29%) 15 (8%) 10 8 (4%) 3 13 (7%) † Systemic therapies administered to 1% or fewer patients in both groups are summarised under “Other”. These therapies included carboplatin, pemetrexed, BIBF 1120, paclitaxel, placebo, aspirin, aflibercept, cyclophosphamide, gefitinib, ifosfamide, vinflunine, and other antineoplastic drugs. (58%) (64%)

Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed: generally well tolerated1 Overall, toxicity was low in both arms pemetrexed n=359 placebo n=180 Patients with ≥ 1 grade 3/4/5 laboratory toxicity 9%* n=33 <1%* n=1 Patients with ≥ 1 grade 3/4/5 non-laboratory toxicity 9% n=32 4% n=8 * Difference between treatment groups was significant (Fisher’s exact test p ≤0.05).

PARAMOUNT: CTCAEs grade 3/4/5 drug-related toxicities (randomised patients)1† * Difference between treatment groups was significant (Fisher’s exact test p≤0.05). † Adverse events were reported using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 (NCI 2006) Alanine aminotransferase, Nausea, Vomiting, Mucositis or Stomatitis, Oedema, Anorexia, Diarrhoea, Watery eye, Constipation Grade 3/4/5 adverse events were reported for less than 1% of patients. placebo (n=180) Anaemia Neutropenia Fatigue Pain Leucopenia Thrombocytopenia Infection Neuropathy pemetrexed (n=359) 10 20 30 4%* n=16 4%* n=13 2% n=6 1% n=4 4%* n=15 1% n=3 1% n=4 <1% n=1 <1%* n= 1 0%* n= 0 0% n=0 <1%* n= 1 1% n=2 0% n=0 <1% n=1

PARAMOUNT: health-related quality of life assessment (EQ-5D)1 Compliance at all time points during maintenance phase was >80% No statistical differences in EQ-5D index score or visual analog scale were observed between treatment arms EQ-5D results suggest that patients can tolerate long-term maintenance treatment with pemetrexed while maintaining their QoL

PARAMOUNT: conclusions1,10 PARAMOUNT demonstrates a positive risk/benefit ratio for the administration of pemetrexed continuation maintenance1,10 Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy offers significantly improved PFS Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy is well tolerated

Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy: approach to maximise outcomes for patients1,2 Proven efficacy ✔ Acceptable toxicity ✔ Conveniently administered ✔ Keeps other treatments available ✔

Acknowledgements We thank all of the patients and their caregivers for participating in this trial.

References Paz-Ares L et al. Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (PARAMOUNT): a double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13:247-255 Stinchcombe TE, Socinski MA. Treatment paradigms for advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer in the era of multiple lines of therapy. J Thorac Oncol 2009;4:243–50. Novello S et al. Maintenance therapy in NSCLC: why? To whom? Which agent? J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2011;30:50. Fidias P, Novello S. Strategies for prolonged therapy in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:5116- 23. Azzoli CG, Temin S, Aliff T, et al. 2011 Focused Update of 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Sep 6.[Epub ahead of print]. D’Addario G, Felip E. Non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2009;20:iv68–iv70. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer V.3.2011. Fort Washington, PA: NCCN, 2011. Scagliotti GV et al. Phase III study comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3543-51. Ciuleanu T et al. Maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care for non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study. Lancet 2009;347:1432-40. ALIMTA Summary of Product Characteristics. Eli Lilly and Company Limited. November 2011.