K E Y P O I N T Sl Isatuximab combined with pomalidomide/ dexamethasone has a manageable safety profile with promising clinical activity.l Isatuximab 10 mg/kg (4 weekly doses followed by dosing every 2 weeks thereafter) has been selected for future combination studies.This phase 1b dose-escalation study evaluated isatuximab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Patients who had received ‡2 prior MM therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor (PI), were enrolled and received isatuximab at 5, 10, or 20 mg/kg (weekly for 4 weeks, followed by every 2 weeks), pomalidomide 4 mg (days 1-21), and dexamethasone 40 mg (weekly) in 28-day cycles until progression/intolerable toxicity. The primary objective was to determine the safety and recommended dose of isatuximab with this combination. Secondary objectives included evaluation of pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and efficacy. Forty-five patients received isatuximab (5 [n 5 8], 10 [n 5 31], or 20 [n 5 6] mg/kg). Patients received a median of 3 (range, 1-10) prior lines; most were refractory to their last regimen (91%), with 82% lenalidomide-refractory and 84% PI-refractory. Median treatment duration was 9.6 months; 19 patients (42%) remain on treatment. Most common adverse events included fatigue (62%), and upper respiratory tract infection (42%), infusion reactions (42%), and dyspnea (40%). The most common grade ‡3 treatment-emergent adverse event was pneumonia, which occurred in 8 patients (17.8%). Hematologic laboratory abnormalities were common (lymphopenia, leukopenia, anemia, 98% each; neutropenia, 93%; and thrombocytopenia, 84%). Overall response rate was 62%; median duration of response was 18.7 months; median progression-free survival was 17.6 months. These results demonstrate potential meaningful clinical activity and a manageable safety profile of isatuximab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM. The 10 mg/kg weekly/every 2 weeks isatuximab dose was selected for future studies.

With inadequate data from randomized controlled trials at the moment, our report indicates that second-line chemotherapy is effective and beneficial in patients with good performance status, higher Hb level along with higher TTP under first-line therapy.

Gastric cancer remains one among the leading causes of cancer-related deaths, regardless of its decreasing incidence and newly available treatment options. Most patients present at an advanced stage and are treated with upfront systemic chemotherapy. Those patients receiving first-line therapy may initially respond to treatment, but many of them relapse over time. In such condition, second-line treatment for disease progression remains the only available option. Although there exists no standard approach in the second-line setting, several phase III trials have shown modest survival benefit in patients receiving irinotecan, taxane and ramucirumab over the best supportive care or active agents. This review analyzes the currently available treatment regimens and future directions of research in the second-line setting for metastatic gastric cancer with the best available evidence. Additionally, the prognostic factors that influence patient survival in those receiving second-line therapy are discussed.

Background: Isatuximab (ISA) is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody with multiple modes of action for killing tumor cells via direct tumor targeting and immune cell engagement. ISA, combined with bortezomib, has demonstrated strong potentiation in a multiple myeloma (MM) xenograft model (Clin Cancer Res 2014:20:4754). This supported evaluation of ISA with bortezomib combinations in pts with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) ineligible for transplant. In the initial cohort, ISA combined with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (dex) was well tolerated with 73% of pts achieving very good partial response (VGPR) or better and 40% with complete response (CR) (Blood 2017; 130: 3160). The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dex (VRd) is also effective in NDMM (Lancet 2017:389:519-27). Here, we report initial data from a Phase Ib study of ISA plus VRd in pts with NDMM (NCT02513186). Methods: Pts with NDMM ineligible for transplantation were treated in 2 phases: induction and maintenance. Induction phase (four 6-week cycles [C]): ISA (10 mg/kg) on Day (D) 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 (C1), followed by D1, 15, 29 (C2-4); bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) on D1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32 (C1-4); lenalidomide (25 mg/day): D1-14 and D22-35 (C1-4); dex (20 mg/day): D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 33. Maintenance phase (4-week cycles): ISA (10 mg/kg) on D1, 15 (all cycles); lenalidomide (25 mg/day): D1-21 (all cycles); dex (40 mg): D1, 8, 15, 22 (all cycles), unless the pt was >75 years of age, then the dose was 20 mg. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and preliminary efficacy (overall response rate [ORR] and CR rate, [IMWG criteria]) of ISA plus VRd. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was evaluated using next generation sequencing (NGS) and flow cytometry (NGF) at a sensitivity of 10-6 in pts achieving VGPR or above. Here, we report results from a protocol-planned interim analysis. Results: All 22 pts were included in the safety analysis (pts who received ≥1 dose of ISA) and 14 were eligible for preliminary efficacy analyses (first 14 pts who completed the 4 induction cycles). Median age was 71 (range 63-77) years. At study entry, 6, 12, and 1 pt were International Staging System Stage I, II, and III, respectively. One pt had extramedullary plasmacytoma at baseline. At data cut-off (Mar 22, 2018), the median number of cycles was 5.5 (1-9). Three pts discontinued treatment (2 VGPR, 1 not efficacy-evaluable): 2 pts due to adverse event (AE); Grade (Gr) 3 infusion reaction (IR) (ISA-related; Gr 3 dyspnea, Gr 2 glottic edema, Gr 2 nasal edema, and Gr 2 generalized rash), and Gr 5 bacteremia (lenalidomide- and dex-related); and 1 pt withdrew consent; 19 (86%) pts are continuing treatment. Dose reduction of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dex was required in 6 (29%), 4 (16%), and 5 (28%) pts, respectively. TEAEs occurred in 19 (86%) pts. Most frequent TEAEs (any Gr; excluding laboratory abnormalities) were constipation (10 pts [46%]), IRs and peripheral edema (9 pts [41%] each), asthenia, diarrhea, and peripheral sensory neuropathy (8 pts [36%] each), hypotension (7 pts [32%]), fatigue and respiratory tract infection (6 pts [27%] each), cough and dyspnea (5 pts [23%] each). Gr ≥3 AEs were reported in 10 (46%) and serious AEs (SAEs) in 4 (18%) pts. Treatment-related SAEs occurred in 2 (9%) pts (IR and pancreatitis). IRs were Gr 1/2 in all but 1 (5%) pt (Gr 3). Gr 3/4 laboratory hematologic abnormalities: lymphopenia (8/22), neutropenia (4/22), thrombocytopenia (4/22)VGPR, 1 partial response (PR) and 1 pt with stable diseaseMedian time to first response was 1.4 months (end of C1) and, with a median follow-up of 7.49 months (at cut-off date), no pt has progressed, with all except 3 pts continuing on therapy. Five (38.5%) of 13 pts achieved MRD-negative status (by NGF and NGS, or NGS only). Conclusion: These data suggest that ISA plus VRd followed by ISA plus Rd is well tolerated with a high ORR of 93%. All responders had VGPR or CR except 1 pt with PR. Quality of CR may have been underestimated due to ISA interference which could be resolved with an interference assay. Funding: Sanofi Disclosures Ocio: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Rodriguez Otero:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Clínica Universidad de Navarra: Employment; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Bringhen:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Consultancy. Oliva:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Attal:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janseen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kanagavel:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fitzmaurice:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Martinez Lopez:Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Part B of this phase 1b study (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02283775) evaluated safety and efficacy of a fixed-volume infusion of isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients. Isatuximab (10 mg/kg weekly for 4 weeks, then every other week) was administered as a fixed-volume infusion of 250 mL (mL/h infusion rate) with standard doses of Pd on 28-day cycles. Patients (N = 47) had a median of three prior treatment lines (range, 1–8). Median duration of exposure was 36.9 weeks and median duration of first, second, and 3+ infusions were 3.7, 1.8, and 1.2 h, respectively. The most common non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (63.8%), infusion reactions (IRs), cough, and upper respiratory tract infection (40.4% each). IRs were all grade 2 and occurred only during the first infusion. The overall response rate was 53.2% in all patients (55.5% in response-evaluable population, 60.0% in daratumumab-naïve patients). Efficacy and safety findings were consistent with data from the isatuximab plus Pd infusion schedule in Part A of this study and also from the phase 3 ICARIA-MM study, and these new data confirm the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of fixed-volume infusion of isatuximab.

Background: For estrogen receptor–positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC), the current standard first-line treatment includes an aromatase inhibitor in combination with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor. When resistance occurs, often related to the occurrence of ESR1 mutations, selective estrogen receptor modulators or degraders (SERDs) may be used, alone or in combination regimens. Amcenestrant (SAR439859), an optimized oral SERD, has shown clinical antitumor activity in combination with palbociclib in patients with ER+/HER2– ABC and, as monotherapy, in patients with and without ESR1 mutations. Here, we describe the study design of AMEERA-5, an ongoing, prospective, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multinational study comparing the efficacy and safety of amcenestrant plus palbociclib versus letrozole plus palbociclib in patients with advanced (locoregional recurrent or metastatic) ER+/HER2– breast cancer. Methods: Patients are pre-/postmenopausal women and men with no prior systemic therapy for ABC. The planned enrollment is 1066 patients. Patients are randomized 1:1 to either amcenestrant 200 mg plus palbociclib 125 mg or letrozole 2.5 mg plus palbociclib 125 mg. Amcenestrant, letrozole, and their matching placebos are taken once daily continuously; palbociclib is taken once daily for 21 days, followed by 7 days off-treatment for a 28-day cycle. Treatment continues until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or decision to stop treatment. Pre-/perimenopausal women and men receive goserelin subcutaneously. Randomization is stratified by de novo metastatic disease, menopausal status, and visceral metastases. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. The key secondary endpoint is overall survival; others are safety, pharmacokinetics, and quality of life. Conclusions: AMEERA-5 is evaluating the efficacy and safety of amcenestrant in combination with palbociclib as first-line therapy in pre-/postmenopausal women and men with ER+/HER2– ABC. ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT04478266.

No abstract

No abstract