Famitinib with Camrelizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel for Advanced Immunomodulatory Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (FUTURE-C-Plus): An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial

Purpose: Camrelizumab, an mAb against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), plus nab-paclitaxel exhibited promising antitumor activity in refractory metastatic immunomodulatory triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Famitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR2, PDGFR, and c-kit. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a novel combination of famitinib, camrelizumab, and nab-paclitaxel in advanced immunomodulatory TNBC. Patients and Methods: This open-label, single-arm, phase II study enrolled patients with previously untreated, advanced, immunomodulatory TNBC (CD8 IHC staining ≥10%). Eligible patients received 20 mg of oral famitinib on days 1 to 28, 200 mg of i.v. camrelizumab on days 1 and 15, and i.v. nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 in 4-week cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), as assessed by investigators per RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), safety, and exploratory biomarkers. Results: Forty-eight patients were enrolled and treated. Median follow-up was 17.0 months (range, 8.7–24.3). Confirmed ORR was 81.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 70.2–92.3], with five complete and 34 partial responses. Median PFS was 13.6 months (95% CI, 8.4–18.8), and median DOR was 14.9 months [95% CI, not estimable (NE)–NE]. Median OS was not reached. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Among 30 patients with IHC, 13 (43.3%) were programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)–negative, and PD-L1 was associated with favorable response. PKD1 and KAT6A somatic mutations were associated with therapy response. Conclusions: The triplet regimen was efficacious and well tolerated in previously untreated, advanced, immunomodulatory TNBC. The randomized controlled FUTURE-SUPER trial is under way to validate our findings. See related commentary by Salgado and Loi, p. 2728