Search

PURPOSE The US Food and Drug Administration approved fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (DS-8201a, T-DXd) for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low (immunohistochemistry 1 + or immunohistochemistry 2+/in situ hybridization–) breast cancer who have received a prior chemotherapy in the metastatic setting or developed disease recurrence during or within 6 months of completing adjuvant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Approval was based on DESTINY-Breast04, a phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial in patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-low breast cancer, determined at a central laboratory. A total of 557 patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks (n = 373) or physicians' choice of chemotherapy (n = 184). RESULTS The study met its primary efficacy end point of progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review assessment in the hormone receptor–positive (HR+) cohort (N = 494) with an estimated hazard ratio (HR) of 0.51(95% CI, 0.40 to 0.64; P < .0001). Key secondary end points were also met, including PFS in the intent-to-treat population with an HR of 0.50 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.63; P < .0001), overall survival (OS) in the HR+ cohort with an HR of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P = .0028) and OS in the intent-to-treat with an HR of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.84; P = .0010). The safety profile of T-DXd was consistent with previously approved indications, and no new safety signals were observed in this study population. CONCLUSION The approval of T-DXd in HER2-low metastatic breast cancer was based on statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS and OS improvements observed in the DESTINY-Breast04 trial and represents the first approved therapy specifically for the treatment of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer.

Objectives: Real-world data (RWD) from the clinical care of patients captured through Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is a valuable resource for research. Understanding the relationship between characteristics and outcomes of patients treated in the real world and in oncology clinical trials by producing evaluable trial-like populations from RWD can advance clinical and regulatory knowledge. Methods: RWD from the Flatiron Health EHR-derived, de-identified, longitudinal database were compared with pooled patient-level data from the three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) supporting regular approval of CDK4/6 inhibitors for patients with previously untreated hormone receptor-positive, HER- metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The RCT group included patients who received aromatase inhibitor (AI) monotherapy (RCT-control), and an experimental group (RCT-experimental) that received a cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor + AI. The real-world control group (rwCG) of patients initiating AI monotherapy was selected using the key eligibility criteria across the RCTs. Patients from the rwCG were matched to the RCT-control and the RCT-experimental patients, respectively. Matching (1:1) was performed through the propensity score (PS) method adjusting for baseline covariates of age, race, site of disease, ECOG PS, and metastatic disease (recurrent, De novo). Multiple imputation (MI) was adopted to impute missing ECOG PS in the rwCG due to the high percentage of missingness. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed for the following groups: A) rwCG and RCT- control B) rwCG and RCT-experimental and C) RCT-control and RCT-experimental. To assess the feasibility of RCT control arm replication, we assessed whether the trial replication hazard ratio (HR) estimates from analysis B were within the published trial estimates’ 95% confidence intervals (CIs). HR and their 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazard model. Results: A total of 1292 patients were selected from the EHR-derived database to comprise the rwCG and 1827 patients were pooled across the RCTs (1106 for RCT-experimental and 721 patients for RCT-control). With MI, 520 rwCG patients were matched to the RCT-control for analysis A, and 658 rwCG patients were matched to the RCT-experimental for analysis B. The results are summarized in Table 1. The point estimate of the PFS HR comparing the rwCG to the RCT-experimental was within the 95% CIs for three RCTs. For OS, the point estimate of the HR was within the 95% CI for MONALESSA-2 but not for PALOMA-2. Conclusion: PFS and OS appeared longer in the RCT-control than in the rwCG, and the difference was more pronounced in OS. While it appears that there is greater similarity for PFS than for OS based on the results of the matched analysis of RCT- experimental vs. rwCG, evaluation of PFS results are limited by substantial differences in assessment and outcome definitions for progression between RCT-control (RECIST) and rwCG. Despite PS matching, there are apparent differences between patients treated in RCTs and routine practice, highlighting the importance of clinical setting, trial selection, study design, and use of randomization. There are still outstanding feasibility questions on the evaluation of OS and further research is required to understand factors potentially impacting the outcomes between RCTs and RWD. Table 1: Estimated Treatment Effects in PFS and OS, rwCG vs RCT-control vs RCT-experimental Citation Format: Christy Osgood, Jiaxin Fan, Xin Gao, Catherine Keane, Jonathan Bryan, James P. Roose, Erik Bloomquist, Aracelis Torres, Shrujal Baxi, Nathan Nussbaum, Fatima Rizvi, Shenghui Tang, Irene Nunes, Julia Beaver, Donna R. Rivera, Lynn Howie, Prashni Paliwal, Laleh Amiri-Kordestani. Feasibility of generating an external control comparator using RWD by matching with previously conducted RCTs: CDK4/6 Inhibitors for the treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-13-03.

Objectives: Real-world data (RWD) from the routine care of patients with cancer captured through EHRs is a valuable resource for research. Understanding the relationship between characteristics and outcomes of patients treated in the real world and those treated in clinical trials is essential to produce evaluable trial-like populations using RWD in oncology for research and regulatory purposes. Methods: This study used: a) RWD from the Flatiron Health EHR-derived, de-identified, longitudinal database (comprising patient-level structured and unstructured data, curated via technology-enabled abstraction selected from approximately 280 US cancer clinics [~800 sites of care]) and b) patient-level data from three completed RCTs (PALOMA-2, MONALEESA-2, and MONARCH-3) including patients with previously untreated hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2/neu negative (HER2-) mBC, then separately pooled across the trials into two treatment groups, patients who received aromatase inhibitor monotherapy (AI) or a CDK4/6 inhibitor + AI. Key eligibility criteria were similar across the RCTs and were used to select a real world external cohort (rwEC) initiating AI monotherapy on or prior to 11 Nov 2015 (end of MONARCH-3 enrollment period). Patients from the rwEC were matched separately to the control arm and experimental arm patients from the pooled RCT using propensity score method (PSM). The propensity score was estimated by a logistic regression using baseline covariates of age, race, site of disease (visceral, non-visceral), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) (0, 1), and metastatic disease (recurrent, new). The matching ratio was 1:1 without replacement with calipers. Covariate balance was measured by the absolute standardized mean difference (ASMD). Due to the high percentage of missing ECOG PS data, matching was repeated 100 times with imputed ECOG PS. The impact of including additional key covariates for propensity matching such as number of disease sites, bone-only disease, and prior endocrine therapy was assessed. Results: There were 1326 patients with HR+, HER2- mBC selected from the EHR-derived database who received first-line AI therapy and 1827 patients randomized in the RCTs (1106 and 721 patients for experimental and control arms, respectively). With 100 matching iterations, 563 rwEC patients on average (range, 547-572) were matched to the RCTs control arm, and 753 rwEC patients on average (range: 741-761) were matched to the RCTs experimental arm. Prior to matching, the ASMD varied widely across all prespecified baseline covariates (4.3 for the rwEC vs. RCTs control arm, 2.6 for the rwEC vs. RCTs experimental arm). After matching was performed, across all baseline covariates used in the PSM, the ASMD was reduced to be under 0.12 for the rwEC vs. RCTs control arm, and under 0.2 for the rwEC vs. RCTs experimental arm in more than 90% of the matching iterations. Analyses looking at the additional baseline covariates to the propensity matching resulted in similar ASMDs. Conclusions: EHR-derived RWD can be used to generate a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics to those treated on RCT. The next step in our trial emulation framework is to analyze the comparability of outcomes between these two matched cohorts. Citation Format: Laleh Amiri-Kordestani, Xin Gao, Shrujal Baxi, Erik Bloomquist, Jonathan Bryan, Lynn Howie, Catherine Keane, Paul G. Kluetz, Christy Osgood, Prashni Paliwal, Donna R. Rivera, James Roose, Julie Schneider, Harpreet Singh, Shenghui Tang, Lijun Zhang, Julia A. Beaver. Generating real-world external comparators for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) using electronic health records (EHRs) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-11-05.

Summary Background Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are oral targeted agents approved for use in combination with endocrine therapy as first-line or second-line treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We previously reported the pooled analyses of progression-free survival in patients in specific clinicopathological subgroups, all of whom received consistent benefit from the addition of a CDKI to hormonal therapy. Here, we report the pooled overall survival results in patients treated with a CDKI and fulvestrant. Methods In this exploratory analysis, we pooled individual patient data from three phase 3 randomised trials of CDKI or placebo in combination with fulvestrant in patients with breast cancer submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration and approved before Aug 1, 2020, in support of marketing applications. All analysed patients were aged at least 18 years, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer, and received at least one dose of CDKI or placebo in combination with fulvestrant. The median overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods, and hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% CIs were estimated using Cox regression models. Patients were analysed collectively, by number of previous lines of systemic endocrine therapy in any disease setting (first-line or endocrine naive vs second-line and later), and in various clinicopathological subgroups of interest. The estimated median overall survival was not reported by group when the pooled population included patients treated across lines of therapy because of potential patient heterogeneity. All results presented are considered exploratory and hypothesis generating. Findings Across the three pooled trials, 1960 patients were randomly assigned between Oct 7, 2013, and June 10, 2016 (12 patients were not treated and 1296 [66%] patients were randomly assigned to CDKI and 652 [33%] to placebo). In all treated patients (n=1948), the estimated HR for overall survival was 0·77 (95% CI 0·68–0·88), with a median follow-up of 43·7 months (IQR 37·8–47·7) and deaths in 935 (48%) of the 1948 patients. The difference in estimated median overall survival was 7·1 months, favouring CDKIs. In patients who received CDKIs or placebo in combination with fulvestrant as first-line systemic endocrine therapy (two trials; n=396), the estimated HR for overall survival was 0·74 (95% CI 0·52–1·07), with a median follow-up of 39·4 months (IQR 37·0–42·2). 123 (31%) of these patients died. The difference in estimated median overall survival could not be calculated because median overall survival was not estimable (95% CI 50·9–not estimable) in the CDKI group and was 45·7 months (95% CI 41·7–not estimable) in the placebo group. In patients who received CDKIs or placebo in combination with fulvestrant as second-line or later systemic endocrine therapy (three trials; n=1552), the estimated HR for overall survival was 0·77 (95% CI 0·67–0·89), with a median follow-up of 45·1 months (95% CI 39·2–48·5). 812 (52%) of these patients died. The difference in estimated median overall survival was 7·0 months, favouring CDKIs. Interpretation The addition of CDKIs to fulvestrant resulted in a consistent overall survival benefit in all pooled patients and within most clinicopathological subgroups of interest. These findings support the existing standard of care of CDKIs plus fulvestrant for the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer. Funding None.

Subgroup analyses are assessments of treatment effects based on certain patient characteristics out of the total study population and are important for interpretation of pivotal oncology trials. However, appropriate use of subgroup analyses results for regulatory decision-making and product labeling is challenging. Typically, drugs approved by the FDA are indicated for use in the total patient population studied; however, there are examples of restriction to a subgroup of patients despite positive study results in the entire study population and also extension of an indication to the entire study population despite positive results appearing primarily in one or more subgroups. In this article, we summarize key issues related to subgroup analyses in the benefit–risk assessment of cancer drugs and provide case examples to illustrate approaches that the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence has taken when considering the appropriate patient population for cancer drug approval. In general, if a subgroup is of interest, the subgroup analysis should be hypothesis-driven and have adequate sample size to demonstrate evidence of a treatment effect. In addition to statistical efficacy considerations, the decision on what subgroups to include in labeling relies on the pathophysiology of the disease, mechanistic justification, safety data, and external information available. The oncology drug review takes the totality of the data into consideration during the decision-making process to ensure the indication granted and product labeling appropriately reflect the scientific evidence to support patient population for whom the drug is safe and effective.

The development and review of combination drug regimens in oncology may present unique challenges to investigators and regulators. For regulatory approval of combination regimens, it is necessary to demonstrate the contribution of effect of each monotherapy to the overall combination. Alternative approaches to traditional designs may be needed to accelerate oncology drug development, for example, when combinations are substantially superior to available therapy, to reduce exposure to less effective therapies, and for drugs that are inactive as single agents and that in combination potentiate activity of another drug. These approaches include demonstration of activity in smaller randomized trials and/or monotherapy trials conducted in a similar disease setting. This article will discuss alternative approaches used in the development of approved drugs in combination, based on examples of recent approvals of combination regimens in renal cell carcinoma.

Background Although the Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Trastuzumab (APT) trial has been adopted clinically, single-arm trials have limitations, and interest remains whether these patients with small node-negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer (EBC) would benefit from more intensive chemotherapy. This analysis explored whether external controls can contextualize single-arm studies to add to clinical decision making in the use of de-escalated therapy in patients with low-risk HER2-positive EBC. Patients and methods Patient-level data from five randomized trials supporting drug approval in adjuvant HER2-positive EBC were pooled, and patients with low-risk EBC were selected (n = 1770). Patients treated concurrently with trastuzumab and either anthracycline/cyclophosphamide/taxane/trastuzumab (ACTH) or taxane/carboplatin/trastuzumab (TCH; n = 1366) were matched (1:1) to patients treated with paclitaxel and trastuzumab (TH) in the APT trial (n = 406) using propensity scores. Patients treated with anthracycline/cyclophosphamide/taxane (ACT; n = 374) were also matched (1:1) to those treated with TH. Propensity scores were estimated using covariates of age, tumor stage, estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, and histological grade. Results After matching, the estimated probabilities of invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) at 3 and 5 years were 98.6% and 96.5% in the TH arm, and 96.6% and 92.9% in the ACTH/TCH arm, respectively. The estimated probabilities of overall survival (OS) at 3 and 5 years were 99.7% and 99.3% in the TH arm, and 99.0% and 97.4% in the ACTH/TCH arm, respectively. Comparing the TH arm with the ACT arm in the matched sample, the estimated difference in iDFS was 7.5% (TH 98.8% and ACT 91.3%) at 3 years and 12.6% (TH 96.1% and ACT 83.5%) at 5 years. The estimated difference in OS was 2.6% (TH 100% and ACT 97.4%) at 3 years, and 5.3% (TH 99.3% and ACT 94.0%) at 5 years. Conclusions Our analyses suggest that patients' outcomes in both arms were in general similar, thus providing additional reassurance regarding de-escalation of therapy.

Over the last decade, there has been tremendous progress in the treatment of patients with gynecologic cancers with a changing therapy landscape. This summary provides an overview of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals for gynecologic cancers from 2010 to 2020, totaling 17 new indications. For each of the approved indications, endpoints, trial design, results, and regulatory considerations are outlined. Among these 17 indications, six received accelerated approval (AA) and 11 received regular approval (RA). As of September 2021, of the six AA, three have subsequently demonstrated clinical benefit resulting in conversion to RA and the remaining three have ongoing clinical trials that have not yet reported results. Approval decisions for these 17 indications were supported by primary efficacy endpoints of progression-free survival (n = 10), objective response rate (n = 6), and overall survival (n = 1) and showed a favorable benefit–risk profile. Among the 17 indications, 15 received priority review and three applications participated in one or more novel Oncology Center of Excellence initiatives, including Real Time Oncology Review, Assessment Aid, and Project Orbis. Current FDA thinking on drug development opportunities and regulatory initiatives currently under way will be discussed.

On June 29, 2020, the FDA approved pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf subcutaneous injection (Phesgo) for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive early-stage and metastatic breast cancer. Patients should be selected for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic test. Approval was primarily based on the FeDeriCa trial, a randomized, open-label, multicenter comparability study of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf subcutaneous injection compared with intravenous pertuzumab and intravenous trastuzumab administered in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings with chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with early breast cancer. The pharmacokinetic endpoints were, first, to demonstrate that the exposure of subcutaneous pertuzumab was not inferior to that of intravenous pertuzumab, and then to demonstrate that the exposure of subcutaneous trastuzumab was not inferior to that of intravenous trastuzumab. The primary endpoints were met with the observed lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence intervals above the prespecified noninferiority margins. The most common adverse reactions were alopecia, nausea, diarrhea, anemia, and asthenia. The totality of the evidence demonstrated comparability of the subcutaneous product to intravenous, allowing for extrapolation and approval of all breast cancer indications for which intravenous trastuzumab and pertuzumab are approved.

On March 8, 2019, the FDA granted accelerated approval to atezolizumab in combination with paclitaxel protein-bound for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) whose tumors express PD-L1 [PD-L1 stained tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC) of any intensity covering ≥1% of the tumor area], as determined by an FDA-approved test. Approval was based on data from IMpassion130, which randomized patients to receive atezolizumab or placebo in combination with paclitaxel protein-bound. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1–positive populations were coprimary endpoints. After 13-month median follow-up, the estimated median PFS in the PD-L1–positive population was 7.4 months in the atezolizumab arm and 4.8 months in the placebo arm [HR = 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48–0.77]. Overall survival (OS) results were immature with 43% deaths in the ITT population, representing 59% of the OS events required to perform the final OS analysis. Adverse reactions occurring in ≥20% of patients receiving atezolizumab with paclitaxel protein-bound were alopecia, peripheral neuropathies, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, anemia, constipation, cough, headache, neutropenia, vomiting, and decreased appetite. Accelerated approval was appropriate taking into account the unmet medical need along with the immaturity of the OS results and potential for PFS in the PD-L1–expressing population to predict clinical benefit.

On April 4, 2019, the FDA approved a supplemental new drug application for palbociclib (IBRANCE), to expand the approved indications in women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant, to include men. Palbociclib was first approved in 2015 for use in combination with letrozole for the treatment of estrogen receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy in postmenopausal women and subsequently in 2016 in combination with fulvestrant in women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer with disease progression following endocrine therapy. The current approval was primarily based on the results of the PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials and, supported by real-world data from electronic health records and insurance claims. To support the safety evaluation in male patients, data from two phase I studies with palbociclib and safety information from the global safety database, were also reviewed. This article summarizes FDA decision-making and data supporting the approval of palbociclib for the treatment of male patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced or MBC.

Background: The Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Trastuzumab (APT) trial was a single-arm trial in patients with small node-negative HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC). Although the regimen used in the APT trial has been adopted clinically, single-arm trials have limitations, and interest remains if these patients, particularly those with T1c or T2 disease would benefit from more intensive chemotherapy. Methods: Patient-level data from five randomized trials (BCIRG 006, NSABP-B31, HERA, N-9831, and APHINITY) submitted to FDA to support drug approval in adjuvant HER2-positive EBC were pooled (n=19087). Patients treated concurrently with trastuzumab and either anthracycline/cyclophosphamide/taxane (ACTH) (n=932), or taxane/carboplatin (TCH) (n=434), were matched (1:1) to patients treated with paclitaxel and trastuzumab (TH) in the APT trial (n=406) using propensity scores. Patients treated with anthracycline/cyclophosphamide/taxane (ACT) (n=374) were also matched (1:1) to those treated with TH on the APT trial. Propensity score models included age, tumor size (Tim/T1a, T1b, T1c, T2), grade, and hormone receptor status. Invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients treated with ACTH or TCH and patients treated with TH from the APT trial, and between patients treated with ACT and TH. Results: After matching, 305 patients were included from the APT trial and 305 patients from the trastuzumab containing external control (ACTH or TCH). One hundred and sixty-nine patients from the APT trial were also matched to 169 patients from the ACT external control. The propensity score matching adequately balanced the patients’ baseline age and disease characteristics (Table 1). The iDFS and OS results are shown in Table 2. Similar results were observed when comparing patients who received ACTH versus TH, and comparing patients who received TCH versus TH. Similar results were also seen in trastuzumab-based treatment subgroups based on tumor size. Conclusions: External controls can be useful to contextualize single arm studies. These exploratory analyses further support the use of de-escalated therapy in patients with low-risk HER2-positive EBC. Table 1: Demographics and Disease CharacteristicsAPT (TH) N = 305External Control (ACTH/TCH) N = 305Std. Mean Diff (%)Age (Yrs), Mean (Std)54.6 (10.7)54.7 (9.8)1.1Primary Tumor Size (cm), Mean (Std)1.3 (0.6)1.4 (0.6)19.7Tumor Stage, n (%)T1ami16 (5.3)11 (3.6)-8.0T1b93 (30.5)95 (31.2)1.4T1c162 (53.1)166 (54.4)2.6T234 (11.2)33 (10.8)-1.1Grade, n (%)G119 (6.2)20 (6.6)1.3G2107 (35.1)95 (31.2)-8.4G3179 (58.7)190 (62.3)7.4ER+, n (%)198 (64.9)200 (65.6)1.4PR+, n (%)158 (51.8)157 (51.5)-0.7HR+, n (%)204 (66.9)202 (66.2)-1.4 APT (TH) N = 169External Control (ACT) N = 169Std. Mean Diff (%)Age (Yrs), Mean (Std)51.9 (10)52.5 (8.9)6.7Tumor Size (cm), Mean (Std)1.5 (0.6)1.6 (0.6)24.3Tumor Stage, n (%)T1ami6 (3.6)6 (3.6)0T1b30 (17.8)25 (14.8)-8.0T1c103 (61.0)109 (64.5)7.4T230 (17.8)29 (17.2)-1.6Grade, n (%)G13 (1.8)3 (1.8)0G252 (30.8)52 (30.8)0G3114 (67.5)114 (67.5)0ER+, n (%)100 (59.2)93 (55.0)-8.4PR+, n (%)81 (47.9)79 (46.8)-2.4HR+, n (%)103 (61.0)100 (59.2)-3.6 Table 2: iDFS and OSAPT (TH) (%)External Control (ACTH/TCH) (%)iDFS3 yrs98.6 (96.4, 99.5)96.6% (93.7, 98.1)5 yrs96.5 (93.6, 98.1)92.9% (88.2, 95.8)OS3 yrs99.7 (97.6, 100.0)99.0% (96.9, 99.7)5 yrs99.3 (97.2%, 99.8)97.4 (94.5, 98.7)APT (TH) (%)External Control (ACT) (%)iDFS3 yrs98.8 (95.3, 99.7)91.3 (85.7, 94.7)5 yrs96.1 (91.5, 98.2)83.5 (76.5, 88.6)OS3 yrs100 (NA, NA)97.4 (93.3, 99.0)5 yrs99.3 (95.3, 99.9)94.0 (88.8, 96.8) Citation Format: Laleh Amiri-Kordestani, Diqiong Xie, Erik Bloomquist, Shenghui Tang, Richard Pazdur, Rajeshwari Sridhara, Sara M Tolaney, Eric P Winer, Julia A Beaver. An FDA analysis of survival outcomes comparing adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab trial (APT) to an external control from historical clinical trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-08.

Summary Background Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are indicated with endocrine therapy as first-line or second-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We aimed to investigate the benefit of adding CDKIs to endocrine therapy in patients whose tumours might have differing degrees of endocrine sensitivity. Methods We pooled individual patient data from all phase 3 randomised breast cancer trials of CDKIs plus endocrine therapy submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration before Jan 1, 2019, in support of marketing applications. Our pooled analysis included all randomly assigned patients in these trials who received at least one dose of CDKI or placebo with endocrine therapy (an aromatase inhibitor [letrozole or anastrazole] or fulvestrant). We did prespecified subgroup analyses in patients with progesterone receptor-negative disease; patients with a disease-free interval of 12 months or less; patients with de-novo metastases, lobular histology, and bone-only disease; patients with visceral metastases; and patients aged up to 40 years. Patients who were not treated, who received tamoxifen as endocrine therapy, or who were treated with an aromatase inhibitor but who had received previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (not first-line) were excluded from our pooled analyses. All studies had a primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival, defined as time from date of randomisation to the initial date of documented cancer progression or death, whichever occurred first. Median progression-free survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CIs for progression-free survival were estimated by means of Cox regression models. Findings The seven studies meeting this study's inclusion criteria were done between Feb 22, 2013, and Nov 3, 2017, with a median duration of follow-up of 19·7 months (IQR 15·9–25·9). 4200 patients were included in the pooled analysis, of whom 1320 received an aromatase inhibitor plus a CDKI, 932 received placebo plus an aromatase inhibitor, 1296 received fulvestrant plus a CDKI, and 652 received fulvestrant plus placebo. Across all seven pooled trials, the difference in estimated median progression-free survival was 8·8 months in favour of CDKI plus endocrine therapy over placebo plus endocrine therapy (range across the trials 6·8–13·3 months; HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·54–0·64). Progression-free survival results favoured the CDKI group in all prespecified clinicopathological subgroups analysed, with similar HRs to that for the broader intended-use population. In first-line aromatase inhibitor-treated patients (n=2252), the median progression-free survival in the CDKI plus aromatase inhibitor group was 28·0 months (95% CI 25·3–29·1) versus 14·9 months (14·0–16·7) in the placebo plus aromatase inhibitor group (difference 13·1 months; range across the trials 13·0–13·3 months; HR 0·55, 95% CI 0·49–0·62). In first-line fulvestrant-treated patients (n=396), the median progression-free survival was 18·6 months (95% CI 14·8–23·5) in the placebo plus fulvestrant group and not estimable (22·4 to not estimable) in the CDKI plus fulvestrant group (difference not estimable; HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·42–0·80). In the patients treated with fulvestrant in the second-line setting and beyond (n=1552), the difference in estimated median progression-free survival between the CDKI plus fulvestrant group and the placebo plus fulvestrant group was 6·9 months in favour of the CDKI group (range across the trials 5·5–7·3 months; HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·49–0·64). Interpretation Since the addition of CDKI to endocrine therapy seemed to benefit all clinicopathological subgroups of interest in this pooled analysis, further research is needed to identify patient subgroups for whom endocrine therapy alone might be appropriate for first-line or second-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Funding None.

PURPOSE The US Food and Drug Administration approved abemaciclib in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) for the adjuvant treatment of adult patients with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative, node-positive, early breast cancer (EBC) at high risk of recurrence and a Ki-67 score ≥ 20%. PATIENTS AND METHODS The approval was based on monarchE, a phase III, open-label, 2-cohort, multicenter trial of patients with EBC randomly assigned to receive abemaciclib plus ET (n = 2,808) or ET alone (n = 2,829). Abemaciclib was given at 150 mg orally twice daily for 2 years. RESULTS Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) in the intent-to-treat population was statistically significant at the second IDFS interim analysis (IA; March 2020; hazard ratio [HR; 95% CI], 0.747 [0.598 to 0.932]; P = .0096); however, only 12.5% of patients had completed adjuvant therapy, and the HR for overall survival (OS) was > 1. A prespecified, controlled analysis of IDFS in patients with Ki-67 ≥ 20% in cohort 1 was statistically significant at the final IDFS analysis (July 2020; HR [95% CI], 0.643 [0.475 to 0.872]; P = .0042). At the first OS IA (April 2021), the majority of patients had completed adjuvant therapy, IDFS remained consistent, and potential detriment in OS was not observed for this subgroup (HR [95% CI], 0.767 [0.511 to 1.152]). The HR for OS in the intent-to-treat population at OS IA remained > 1 (HR [95% CI], 1.091 [0.818 to 1.455]). More patients in the abemaciclib plus ET arm experienced treatment emergent adverse events (all grades 98.4% v 88.8%, grade 3 ≥ 49.7% v 16.3%). CONCLUSION The approval of abemaciclib in adjuvant EBC was limited to patients with high risk of recurrence and Ki-67 ≥ 20%, given their favorable benefit:risk with a statistically significant IDFS advantage and no observed detriment on survival.

PURPOSE Many older women will be treated with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor and an aromatase inhibitor (AI), given US Food and Drug Administration approval of three agents in this class. The current pooled analysis examines the efficacy and safety of this combination in older women. PATIENTS AND METHODS We pooled data from three randomized controlled studies (N = 1,827) of different CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with an AI for initial treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative metastatic breast cancer. The effect of age on progression-free survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and a Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS For patients age 75 years or older (n = 198) who were treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and an AI, hazard ratio was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.31 to 0.76) with an estimated median progression-free survival of 31.1 months (95% CI, 20.2 months to not reached) versus 13.7 months (95% CI, 10.9 months to 24.9 months) for those treated with an AI. Incidence of grade 3 to 4 adverse events was 88.8% in patients age 75 years and older and 73.4% in patients younger than age 75 years. Patients age 75 years or older reported a decline in quality-of-life measures using the EQ-5D regardless of treatment with AI alone or with the addition of a CDK4/6 inhibitor. CONCLUSION There was similar efficacy with a CDK4/6 inhibitor in combination with an AI compared with AI alone for first-line treatment of hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative metastatic breast cancer in older women compared with younger patients. Patients older than age 75 years experienced higher rates of toxicity, dose modifications, and a decrease from baseline in quality-of-life measures.

On July 24, 2020, a workshop sponsored by the National Brain Tumor Society was held on innovating brain tumor clinical trials based on lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience. Various stakeholders from the brain tumor community participated including the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), academic and community clinicians, researchers, industry, clinical research organizations, patients and patient advocates, and representatives from the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the National Cancer Institute. This report summarizes the workshop and proposes ways to incorporate lessons learned from COVID-19 to brain tumor clinical trials including the increased use of telemedicine and decentralized trial models as opportunities for practical innovation with potential long-term impact on clinical trial design and implementation.

Background: Cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are oral targeted agents approved for use in combination with endocrine therapy as 1st or 2nd line treatment of hormone-receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We previously reported the pooled analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in certain clinicopathological subgroups, all of whom received consistent benefit from the addition of a CDKI to hormonal therapy. Here, we report the pooled overall survival (OS) results in patients treated with a CDKI and fulvestrant. Methods: We pooled individual patient data (n=1948) from three phase III randomized breast cancer trials of CDKI in combination with fulvestrant submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of marketing applications. All analyzed patients received at least one dose of CDKI or placebo in combination with fulvestrant. The median OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods, and hazard ratios (HR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox regression models. Patients were analyzed collectively, by number of prior lines of systemic endocrine therapy in any disease setting (1st-line or endocrine naive vs. 2nd -line and later), and in various clinicopathologic subgroups of interest. Findings: In all pooled patients (n=1948), the estimated OS HR was 0∙77 (95% CI 0∙68-0∙88), with a median follow-up of 43∙7 months (interquartile range, (IQR): 37∙8, 47∙7) and deaths in 48% of patients. The difference in estimated median OS was 7∙1 months, favoring CDKIs. In patients who were endocrine therapy naive and received CDKIs as 1st -line systemic endocrine therapy (2 trials, n=396), the estimated OS HR was 0∙74 (95% CI 0∙52-1∙07), with a median follow-up of 39∙4 months (IQR: 37∙0, 42∙2) and deaths in 31% of patients. The median OS difference could not be calculated, since median OS was not reached on CDKI arm. In patients who received CDKIs as 2nd-line or later systemic endocrine therapy (3 trials, n=1552), the estimated OS HR was 0∙77 (95% CI 0∙67-0∙89), with a median follow-up of 45∙1 months (IQR: 39∙2, 48∙5) and deaths in 52% of patients. The median OS difference was 7∙0 months, favoring CDKIs. Additional subgroup analyses of OS by progesterone receptor status, site of metastases, breast cancer histology, ECOG performance status, race, and de novo metastatic presentation all favored adding CDKI to fulvestrant. Patients with de novo metastatic disease (n=470, OS HR 0∙91 [95% CI 0∙68-1∙21]) and Asian patients (n=394, OS HR 0∙95 [95% CI 0∙81-1∙60]) appeared to benefit relatively less from the addition of CDKI to fulvestrant. Although the estimated OS HR appeared to favor fulvestrant alone in patients age < 40 [HR 1∙5 (95% CI 0∙75-3∙02)], this result must be interpreted with caution, given the small sample size (n=89) and correspondingly wide confidence interval. Evaluation of other age subgroups showed results in favor of the addition of CDKI to fulvestrant. All results presented are considered exploratory and hypothesis-generating. Interpretation: Addition of CDKIs to fulvestrant appears to confer a consistent overall survival benefit across all pooled patients and within most clinicopathological subgroups of interest. Funding: None. Declaration of Interest: All authors declare no competing interests. Ethical Approval: All patients in the included trials were required to provide informed written consent, and all trials had institutional review board or ethical approval.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to rucaparib in May 2020 for the treatment of adult patients with deleterious BRCA mutation (germline and/or somatic)-associated metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who have been treated with androgen receptor-directed therapy and a taxane. This approval was based on data from the ongoing multicenter, open-label single-arm trial TRITON2. The primary endpoint, confirmed objective response rate, in the 62 patients who met the above criteria, was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 31%–57%). The median duration of response was not estimable (95% CI: 6.4 to not estimable). Fifty-six percent of patients had a response duration of >6 months and 15% >12 months. The safety profile of rucaparib was generally consistent with that of the class of poly-(ADP-ribose) polymerase enzyme inhibitors and other trials of rucaparib in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Deaths due to adverse events (AEs) occurred in 1.7% of patients, and 8% discontinued rucaparib because of an AE. Grade 3–4 AEs occurred in 59% of patients. No patients with prostate cancer developed myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia. The trial TRITON3 in patients with mCRPC is ongoing and is planned to verify the clinical benefit of rucaparib in mCRPC. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting this accelerated approval. Implications for Practice The accelerated approval of rucaparib for the treatment of adult patients with deleterious BRCA mutation (germline and/or somatic)-associated metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer who have been treated with androgen receptor-directed therapy and a taxane represents the first approved therapy for this selected patient population. This approval was based on a single-arm trial demonstrating a confirmed objective response rate greater than that of available therapy with a favorable duration of response and an acceptable toxicity profile. The ongoing trial TRITON3 is verifying the clinical benefit of this drug.

On December 19, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval to olaparib monotherapy for first-line maintenance treatment of BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) advanced ovarian cancer and, on May 8, 2020, expanded the indication of olaparib to include its use in combination with bevacizumab for first-line maintenance treatment of homologous recombination deficient (HRD)–positive advanced ovarian cancer. Both these approvals were based on randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Approval for olaparib monotherapy was based on the SOLO-1 trial, comparing the efficacy of olaparib versus placebo in patients with BRCAm advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer after surgical cytoreduction and first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Two companion diagnostic (CDx) tests were approved with this indication: BRACAnalysis CDx, for germline BRCA1/2 alterations, and FoundationOne CDx, for BRCA1/2 alterations in tissue specimens. Approval for olaparib in combination with bevacizumab was based on the results of the PAOLA-1 trial that compared olaparib with bevacizumab versus placebo plus bevacizumab in patients with advanced high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Myriad myChoice CDx was designated as a companion diagnostic device for use of olaparib plus bevacizumab combination for ovarian cancer associated with HRD-positive status. Both trials demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival and favorable benefit-risk profiles for the indicated populations. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting the approval of olaparib as monotherapy and in combination with bevacizumab for maintenance therapy in this setting. Implications for Practice These approvals represent the first poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, alone or in combination with bevacizumab, approved in first-line maintenance treatment of women with advanced ovarian cancer after cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy. In patients with BRCA-mutated tumors, olaparib monotherapy demonstrated a 70% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with placebo, and olaparib in combination with bevacizumab demonstrated a 67% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with bevacizumab alone in homologous recombination deficient–positive tumors. These approvals represent a major advance for the treatment of women with advanced ovarian cancer who are in complete or partial response after their initial platinum-based chemotherapy.

On May 3, 2019, the FDA granted regular approval to ado-trastuzumab emtansine (KADCYLA), for the adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2-positive early-breast cancer (EBC) who have residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant taxane-based chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based treatment. Approval was based on data from the KATHERINE trial, which randomized patients to receive ado-trastuzumab emtansine or trastuzumab. At 3 years, the event-free rate for invasive disease-free survival in the ado-trastuzumab emtansine arm was 88.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 85.8–90.7] compared with 77.0% (95% CI, 73.8–80.7) in the trastuzumab arm, (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39–0.64; P < 0.0001). Results from secondary endpoints, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses generally supported the primary efficacy endpoint results. Common adverse reactions (>25% and higher incidence in ado-trastuzumab emtansine arm) with ado-trastuzumab emtansine were fatigue, nausea, increased transaminases, musculoskeletal pain, hemorrhage, thrombocytopenia, headache, peripheral neuropathy, and arthralgia. Ado-trastuzumab emtansine is the first drug approved for the treatment of patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment and surgery. This article summarizes the FDA review and the data supporting the approval of ado-trastuzumab emtansine as a component of treatment for patients with HER2-positive EBC with residual disease.

Purpose The outcome and proportion of patients with bone-only (BO) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has not been well described. We sought to describe the differential outcomes of patients with BO MBC in clinical trials and explore whether there was a discrepancy in radiographic reads between investigator and blinded independent central review. Methods We pooled and analyzed data on 10,521 patients from 13 prospective trials submitted for MBC treatment in initial or supplemental New Drug or Biologics License Applications from 2005. Three subsets were evaluated: BO, bone with other metastases (BWO), and no bone metastases (NBM). Early discordance rate and late discordance rate were calculated from 3,733 and 2,813 patients subject to a blinded independent central review, respectively. Results Bone metastases were identified in 49% (range: 42% to 73%) of patients across trials. BO disease was present in 12.5% (range: 4% to 26%), dependent on subtype. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the pooled trials demonstrated improved outcomes for the BO subgroup compared with other subgroups (BO v BWO PFS hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.591 to 0.696; BO v NBM PFS HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.76; BO v BWO OS HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.61; BO v NBM OS HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.76). The BO subgroup has a higher early discordance rate and lower late discordance rate than the BWO and NBM subgroups. Conclusion To our knowledge, this review is the largest analysis to date of the BO subgroup of MBC and suggests this subgroup may have a distinct natural history. There also seems to be a difference in how the local investigators assessed progression events in the BO subgroup when compared with the other two groups.

Over the past 20 years, there has been increasing interest in the use of Bayesian statistical methods for the analysis of clinical trials used to support regulatory decisions. Bayesian methods for the analysis of clinical trials are an attractive option when good prior information is available. Yet, in many cases, prior information is scarce and only tentative or proprietary prior information exists. In these situations, it is necessary to use noninformative type or skeptical-type priors. We undertook a systematic study of Bayesian methods and applied them to 13 randomized clinical trials in metastatic breast cancer submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for registrational purposes. Across all 13 studies, there were a total of 10,521 patients using 10 experimental agents. Our results demonstrated that Bayesian analyses with noninformative priors provided similar results to more traditional analyses. We also found that early interim looks at the study results can vary widely based upon the type of prior used. Finally, we found that pre-defined threshold stopping rules need to be relatively strong to prevent trials from stopping very early. Our results suggest that, when prior information is limited and a noninformative prior is used, there is little numerical difference between Bayesian methods and more traditional analysis methods. Bayesian methods, however, may provide additional summaries of the data that are more easily interpretable than means and confidence intervals.

4516 Background: Immunotherapy-based combination therapies (IO-X) are standard of care for metastatic RCC (mRCC) in the frontline setting. Limited data is available on the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy prior to IO-X in patients (pts) with mRCC (Bakouny, et al. GU ASCO 2020). We assessed the correlation between nephrectomy prior to IO-X and overall survival (OS) in pts with de novo mRCC. Methods: We pooled data from trials submitted for FDA review of a checkpoint inhibitor combination as first-line treatment for pts with mRCC. We only included trials with available data for stage at initial diagnosis (dx) to identify pts with stage IV disease at initial dx and to exclude those with nephrectomy in the non-metastatic setting. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median OS in pts with de novo mRCC with and without nephrectomy prior to IO-X. Results: Five trials met inclusion criteria, all of which evaluated IO in combination with a kinase inhibitor. Data for stage at initial dx was available in 1708 pts who received IO-X. The majority of pts were male (72%) and White (80%). Among the 849 pts (50%) with stage IV RCC at initial dx, 523 pts (62%) had nephrectomy prior to IO-X. All pts had clear cell histology; Sarcomatoid differentiation was present in tumor pathology of 25% and 10% of pts with and without prior nephrectomy, respectively. Proportion of pts with favorable, intermediate and poor risk disease was 10%, 70% and 20%, respectively. OS appeared better in those with stage IV disease at dx who had prior nephrectomy compared to pts without nephrectomy (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.42, 0.68), even after adjusting for age and prognostic risk group (HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.75) (see table). Conclusions: In this retrospective exploratory analysis, nephrectomy prior to IO-X in pts with new dx of stage IV RCC appeared to be associated with improved OS, even when controlling for age and prognostic risk group. The decision for nephrectomy is affected by factors such as medical comorbidities which could not be completely controlled. Results should be considered hypothesis generating.[Table: see text]

4559 Background: The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk model was developed for prognosis of patients with mRCC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted monotherapy in the first-line setting. Efficacy in trials of anti-VEGF therapy has been generally consistent across risk groups, including for overall survival (OS). For trials of immunotherapy combinations, the small numbers of OS events for the favorable risk group in each trial limited reliable conclusions; however, there was a suggestion of possible differential effects on OS between favorable risk and other risk groups. Methods: We pooled individual patient data (n=3447) from four phase III randomized trials of combinations of immunotherapy + immunotherapy (n=1) or immunotherapy + anti-VEGF therapy (n=3) submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration in support of marketing applications. All trials calculated IMDC risk group for each patient and used a control arm of sunitinib. We combined intermediate and poor prognostic groups (“intermediate/poor”) and compared their OS to that of the favorable risk group using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards methods. Results: In this pooled analysis, treatment with combination immune checkpoint therapy did not demonstrate an improvement in OS compared to sunitinib in the favorable risk group (HR 0.953; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.27). An improvement in OS was observed in the intermediate/poor risk group (HR 0.696; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.78). Conclusions: Our analysis of OS in patients treated with immunotherapy combinations compared to sunitinib suggests possible differential benefit in the favorable risk compared to the intermediate/poor risk group. These results are not conclusive and considered exploratory due to the relative immaturity of OS in the favorable risk group. Follow-up for survival continues in each study to allow for more definitive results.[Table: see text]

1055 JJG, JC, TMP contributed equally. JAB, LAK contributed equally. Background: Cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are oral targeted agents approved for use in combination with endocrine therapy as first or secondline treatment of hormone-receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We previously reported the pooled analyses of progression-free survival of patients in certain clinicopathologic subgroups, and results showed a consistent benefit from the addition of a CDKI to endocrine therapy. Here, we report the pooled overall survival (OS) results in patients treated with a CDKI plus fulvestrant. Methods: We pooled individual patient data (n=1948) from three phase III randomized breast cancer trials of a CDKI plus fulvestrant submitted to the FDA in support of marketing applications. All analyzed patients received at least one dose of a CDKI or placebo, plus fulvestrant. The median OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods, and hazard ratios (HR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox regression models. Results: Results of OS analyses, including all pooled patients, patients treated in the first-line setting, and patients treated in the second line and later settings, are summarized in the table below. Additional subgroup analyses of OS by progesterone receptor status, site of metastases, breast cancer histology, ECOG performance status, race, and de novo metastatic presentation all favored adding a CDKI to fulvestrant. In patients age < 40, the estimated OS HR favored fulvestrant alone, but this subgroup had a small sample size (n=89), so this result must be interpreted with caution. All results are considered exploratory and hypothesis-generating. Conclusions: Addition of CDKIs to fulvestrant appears to confer a consistent survival benefit across all pooled patients and within most clinicopathological subgroups of interest.[Table: see text]

On February 19, 2016, the FDA approved palbociclib (Ibrance, Pfizer) for use in combination with fulvestrant (Faslodex, AstraZeneca) for the treatment of women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with disease progression following endocrine therapy. The approval was based on the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 521 pre- and postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced or MBC. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive palbociclib plus fulvestrant (n = 347) or placebo plus fulvestrant (n = 174). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS (9.5 months vs. 4.6 months) was observed in patients receiving palbociclib plus fulvestrant [HR 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.36–0.59; P < 0.0001]. Safety data confirmed the known adverse reaction profile of palbociclib. The most common adverse reactions (>20%) in patients treated with palbociclib were neutropenia, leukopenia, infections, fatigue, nausea, anemia, stomatitis, headache, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia. This approval was granted in the context of a prior accelerated approval for palbociclib in combination with letrozole in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 22(20); 4968–72. ©2016 AACR.

The present study examined the attitudes of California-based school psychologists toward transgender-identifying students and assessed their efforts and roles in supporting this student population in light of recently passed legislation in California (AB 1266; 2013), which requires public schools in the state to provide transgender students with increased school-based equity and opportunities. Specifically, the authors examined the attitudes of California school psychologists toward transgender students, the training and professional development of these school psychologists in the area of gender identity, their leadership regarding the preparation and implementation of the law, and their involvement in supporting district efforts and transgender students themselves in light of the legislation.

On December 22, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updated the product label for nilotinib to include information for providers on how to discontinue this drug in certain patients. With the updated dosing recommendations, select patients with chronic phase myeloid leukemia (CML) taking nilotinib for 3 years or more and whose leukemia has responded with sustained molecular remission (MR4.5, BCR-ABL transcripts of ≤0.0032%) as determined by a FDA-approved test may be eligible to discontinue nilotinib. The updated dosing regimen was based on the efficacy results from two trials that measured how long patients could stop taking nilotinib without the leukemia returning (treatment-free remission). Trial results demonstrated that, among selected patients who received nilotinib as first-line therapy or after transition from imatinib, approximately 50% continued to be in remission at 96 weeks after stopping therapy. Relapses continued to occur throughout the study, indicating that long-term monitoring is needed for safety and disease monitoring. Discontinuation of treatment was associated with an increased risk of low grade musculoskeletal adverse events, some of which were prolonged. Overall, the results support the approval of updates to the dosing recommendations with regard to treatment discontinuation in selected patients who have received nilotinib for at least 3 years, are in a sustained molecular remission, and who can undergo appropriate monitoring. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The updated dosing information provides eligibility criteria for treatment discontinuation, strict monitoring criteria after nilotinib discontinuation, and guidance for treatment reinitiation in eligible patients with chronic phase myeloid leukemia. About half of appropriately selected patients remained in remission 96 weeks after treatment discontinuation. Patients may experience musculoskeletal pain on withdrawal of treatment, incidence of which appears to decrease over time; however, some patients may have long lasting events. The decision to withdraw or continue treatment with nilotinib should be based on clinical condition and patient preferences.

On December 12, 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved ramucirumab for use in combination with docetaxel for the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients with epidermal growth factor receptor or anaplastic lymphoma kinase genomic tumor aberrations should have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving ramucirumab. This approval was based on an improvement in overall survival (OS) with an acceptable toxicity profile in a randomized, multicenter, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 1,253 patients with metastatic NSCLC previously treated with a platinum-based combination therapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel or placebo in combination with docetaxel. The primary endpoint was OS. Patients who received ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel had improved OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75, 0.98). Median OS was 10.5 months on the ramucirumab plus docetaxel arm versus 9.1 months on the placebo plus docetaxel arm. The most frequent (≥30%) adverse reactions in ramucirumab-treated patients were fatigue, neutropenia, and diarrhea. The most frequent (≥5%) grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions in the ramucirumab arm were fatigue, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, leukopenia, and hypertension. Implications for Practice: This report presents key information on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of ramucirumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, given in combination with docetaxel for the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer whose disease has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. This report specifically addresses the issues of safety in patients with squamous cell tumors, effect of treatment in elderly patients, and uncertainties regarding effects in patients with tumors harboring epidermal growth factor receptor or anaplastic lymphoma kinase genomic tumor aberrations.

On July 3, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval for belinostat (Beleodaq; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.), a histone deacetylase inhibitor, for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). A single-arm, open-label, multicenter, international trial in the indicated patient population was submitted in support of the application. Belinostat was administered intravenously at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes once daily on days 1 to 5 of a 21-day cycle. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) based on central radiology readings by an independent review committee. The ORR was 25.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.3–34.6] in 120 patients that had confirmed diagnoses of PTCL by the Central Pathology Review Group. The complete and partial response rates were 10.8% (95% CI, 5.9–17.8) and 15.0% (95% CI, 9.1–22.7), respectively. The median duration of response, the key secondary efficacy endpoint, was 8.4 months (95% CI, 4.5–29.4). The most common adverse reactions (>25%) were nausea, fatigue, pyrexia, anemia, and vomiting. Grade 3/4 toxicities (≥5.0%) included anemia, thrombocytopenia, dyspnea, neutropenia, fatigue, and pneumonia. Belinostat is the third drug to receive accelerated approval for the treatment of relapsed or refractory PTCL. Clin Cancer Res; 21(12); 2666–70. ©2015 AACR.

On March 13, 2017, the FDA approved ribociclib (KISQALI; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.), a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, in combination with an aromatase inhibitor as initial endocrine-based therapy for the treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. The approval was based on a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international clinical trial (MONALEESA-2). A total of 668 patients were randomized to receive either ribociclib plus letrozole (n = 334) or placebo plus letrozole (n = 334). An improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) was observed in patients receiving ribociclib plus letrozole compared with patients receiving placebo plus letrozole [HR = 0.556; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.429–0.720]. Overall response rate (ORR) in patients with measurable disease was 52.7% (95% CI, 46.6–58.9) in the ribociclib plus letrozole arm and 37.1% (95% CI, 31.1–43.2) in the placebo plus letrozole arm. Overall survival data were immature. The most common adverse reactions observed in 20% or more of patients taking ribociclib were neutropenia, nausea, fatigue, diarrhea, leukopenia, alopecia, vomiting, constipation, headache, and back pain. This article summarizes FDA decision-making and data supporting the approval of ribociclib. Clin Cancer Res; 24(13); 2999–3004. ©2018 AACR. See related commentary by Spring and Bardia, p. 2981

Background: With recent FDA approvals of inhibitors of Cyclin Dependent Kinases 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) in combination with endocrine therapy for the treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC), an increasing number of older adults will be treated with this class of agents. An improved understanding of the safety and efficacy of CDK 4/6 inhibitors in this population is important to inform clinical decision making for the treatment of older patients. Methods: Data from two prospective randomized controlled studies (n=1334) of different CDK 4/6 inhibitors in combination with an aromatase inhibitor for the initial treatment of postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor positive MBC were pooled and analyzed. The effect of age on progression free survival (PFS) was explored using Kaplan Meier (KM) estimates and a Cox-proportional hazard model. Safety analysis included adverse events up to 30 days after last administration of drug based on standardized adverse event datasets. Results: Age was balanced between the two studies, and between treatment arms within each study. The median age of women was 62 (range 23-91). Of the 1334 total patients, 42% were ≥65, and 24% were ≥ 70. For patients ≥70 who were treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor in combination with an aromatase inhibitor, the estimated PFS was not reached (95% CI: 25.1months, NR) vs an estimated 18 months (95% CI: 13.8, 31.3) for those treated only with an aromatase inhibitor. For patients Safety was evaluated in the 778 patients who received at least one dose of CDK4/6 inhibitor. Adverse Events by Age in Patients Treated with a CDK4/6 Inhibitor Patients < 65 yearsPatients≥65 yearsPatients≥70 years N=447N=331N=187 n (%)n (%)n (%)Grade 1-2 Adverse Events437 (98)324 (98)185 (99)Grade 3-4 Adverse Events340 (76)276 (83)159 (85)Serious Adverse Events72 (16)88 (27)50 (27)Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation35 (8)56 (17)38 (20)Adverse Events leading to dose reduction and/or interruption323 (72)253 (76)147 (79)Selected Adverse Events Neutropenia (all grades)341 (76)256 (77)150 (80)Grade 3-4 neutropenia292 (65)228 (69)134 (72)Infections (all grades)190 (43)165 (50)100 (53)Hepatotoxicty (all grades)79 (18)51 (15)34 (18)Grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity32 (7)16 (5)12 (6)Fatigue (all grades)195 (44)153 (46)89 (48)Grade 3 fatigue11 (2)11 (3)7 (4) Conclusions: This exploratory analysis suggests the use of a CDK4/6 inhibitor in combination with an aromatase inhibitor for the first line treatment of HR+ MBC in older women results in similar efficacy benefit as seen in younger women. Although incidence and severity of Grade 1-4 adverse reactions appeared similar between age groups, greater serious adverse events and discontinuations occurred in patients ≥65. The inclusion of greater numbers of patients ≥70, in clinical trials will further inform clinicians about the safety and efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors in older adults. Citation Format: Singh H, Howie LJ, Bloomquist E, Wedam S, Amiri-Kordestani L, Tang S, Sridhara R, Ibrahim A, Goldberg K, McKee A, Beaver JA, Pazdur R. A U.S. food and drug administration pooled analysis of outcomes of older women with hormone-receptor positive metastatic breast cancer treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor as initial endocrine based therapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS5-06.

1024Background: Cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are approved for 1st and 2nd line endocrine-based therapy in hormone-receptor positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. There is...

On February 3, 2015, the FDA granted accelerated approval to palbociclib (IBRANCE, Pfizer Inc.), an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4 and CDK6), for use in combination with letrozole for the treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy for their metastatic disease. The approval is based on a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase I/II trial (PALOMA-1) in 165 patients randomized to palbociclib (125 mg orally daily for 21 consecutive days, followed by 7 days off treatment) plus letrozole (2.5 mg orally daily) or letrozole alone. The phase II portion of the trial was divided into two cohorts: cohort 1 enrolled 66 biomarker-unselected patients and cohort 2 enrolled 99 biomarker-positive patients. The major efficacy outcome measure was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A large magnitude of improvement in PFS was observed in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole compared with patients receiving letrozole alone (HR, 0.488; 95% confidence interval, 0.319–0.748). Multiple sensitivity analyses were supportive of clinical benefit. The most common adverse reaction in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole was neutropenia. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting accelerated approval based on PALOMA-1 that may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in the ongoing and fully accrued confirmatory trial PALOMA-2. Clin Cancer Res; 21(21); 4760–6. ©2015 AACR.

Application of electrical field to the heart during the refractory period of the beat has been shown to increase the force of contraction both in animal models and in heart failure patients (cardiac contractility modulation, or CCM). A direct increase in intracellular calcium during CCM has been suggested to be the mechanism behind the positive inotropic effect of CCM. We studied the effect of CCM on isolated rabbit cardiomyocytes and perfused whole rat hearts. The effect of CCM was observed in single cells via fluorescent measurements of intracellular calcium concentration ([Ca2+]i) and cell length (L). Cells were paced once per second throughout these recordings, and CCM stimulation was delivered via biphasic electric fields of 20 ms duration applied during the refractory period. CCM increased the peak amplitude of both [Ca2+]i and L for the first beat during CCM compared to control, but then [Ca2+]i and L decayed to levels lower than the control. During CCM, all contractions had a faster time to peak for both [Ca2+]i and L; after stopping CCM the rise times returned to control levels. In the whole rat heart, the positive inotropic effect of CCM stimulation on left ventricular pressure was completely abolished in the presence of metoprolol, a beta‐1 adrenergic blocker. In summary, the CCM‐induced changes in intracellular calcium handling by cardiomyocytes did not explain the sustained positive inotropic effect in the whole heart and the β‐adrenergic pathway may be involved in the CCM mechanism of action., Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is a heart failure therapy which delivers electrical pulses to the heart during refractory period. While there are some promising reports on the therapy's safety and effectiveness in humans, the underlining mechanism remains unknown. We studied the effect of CCM pulses in isolated rabbit cardiomyocytes and isolated rat heart in the presence of beta adrenergic blocker and recorded intracellular calcium transients and contractions. We concluded that the CCM‐induced changes in intracellular calcium handling by cardiomyocytes did not explain the sustained positive iotropic efect in the whole heart and beta‐adrenergic pathway may be involved in the CCM mechanism of action.