Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma from EV-301: A Phase 3 Trial of Enfortumab Vedotin Versus Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In comparison to chemotherapy, enfortumab vedotin (EV) prolonged overall survival in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma in EV-301. The objective of the present study was to assess patient experiences of EV versus chemotherapy using patient-reported outcome (PRO) analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: For patients in the phase 3 EV-301 trial randomized to EV or chemotherapy we assessed responses to the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) at baseline, weekly for the first 12 wk, and then every 12 wk until discontinuation. We analyzed the QLQ-C30 change from baseline to week 12, the confirmed improvement rate, and the time to improvement or deterioration. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Baseline PRO compliance rates were 91% for the EV arm (n = 301) and 89% for the chemotherapy arm (n = 307); the corresponding average rates from baseline to week 12 were 70% and 67%. Patients receiving EV versus chemotherapy had reduced pain (difference in change from baseline to week 12: -5.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.8 to -0.7; p = 0.027) and worsening appetite loss (7.3, 95% CI 0.90-13.69; p = 0.026). Larger proportions of patients in the EV arm reported HRQoL improvement from baseline than in the chemotherapy arm; the odds of a confirmed improvement across ten QLQ-C30 function/symptom scales were 1.67 to 2.76 times higher for EV than for chemotherapy. Patients in the EV arm had a shorter time to first confirmed improvement in global health status (GHS)/QoL, fatigue, pain, and physical, role, emotional, and social functioning (all p < 0.05). EV delayed the time to first confirmed deterioration in GHS/QoL (p = 0.027), but worsening appetite loss occurred earlier (p = 0.009) in comparison to chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: HRQoL with EV was maintained, and deterioration in HRQoL was delayed with EV in comparison to chemotherapy. Better results with EV were reported for some scales, with the greatest difference observed for pain. These findings reinforce the EV safety and efficacy outcomes and benefits observed in EV-301. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with previously treated advanced cancer of the urinary tract receiving the drug enfortumab vedotin maintained their HRQoL in comparison to patients treated with chemotherapy. The EV-301 trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03474107 and on EudraCT as 2017-003344-21.

Japanese subgroup analysis of EV-301: An open-label, randomized phase 3 study to evaluate enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy in subjects with previously treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is an antibody-drug conjugate showing significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy for patients with previously treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) in EV-301. This subgroup analysis was conducted to further analyze the efficacy and safety in a Japanese population. METHODS: In the open-label, phase 3 EV-301 trial, patients with la/mUC were randomized 1:1 to EV 1.25 mg/kg on Days 1, 8, and 15 for 28-day cycles or investigator-preselected standard chemotherapy (SC; docetaxel or paclitaxel for patients in Japan) on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Primary endpoint was OS and secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Safety/tolerability was also evaluated. RESULTS: As of the July 15, 2020 cut-off date for the interim analysis, the Japanese subgroup included 86 patients (EV: n = 36; SC: n = 50). Median OS was 15.18 months for EV and 10.55 months for SC (HR: 0.437 [95% CI: 0.209, 0.914]). Median PFS was 6.47 months for EV and 5.39 months for SC (HR: 0.464 [95% CI: 0.258, 0.835]). Confirmed ORR was 34.4% for EV and 21.3% for SC. A higher proportion of patients receiving SC versus EV had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; 97.9% vs. 91.7%, respectively), including grade ≥ 3 TRAEs (75.0% vs. 63.9%). CONCLUSIONS: This subgroup analysis confirmed that EV, with consistent efficacy and safety/tolerability in the EV-301 Japanese subgroup and overall study population, represents an important treatment option for previously treated patients with la/mUC.

Enfortumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma have poor overall survival after platinum-containing chemotherapy and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor treatment. METHODS: We conducted a global, open-label, phase 3 trial of enfortumab vedotin for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-containing chemotherapy and had had disease progression during or after treatment with a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) or investigator-chosen chemotherapy (standard docetaxel, paclitaxel, or vinflunine), administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent randomization; 301 were assigned to receive enfortumab vedotin and 307 to receive chemotherapy. As of July 15, 2020, a total of 301 deaths had occurred (134 in the enfortumab vedotin group and 167 in the chemotherapy group). At the prespecified interim analysis, the median follow-up was 11.1 months. Overall survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median overall survival, 12.88 vs. 8.97 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.89; P = 0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median progression-free survival, 5.55 vs. 3.71 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (93.9% in the enfortumab vedotin group and 91.8% in the chemotherapy group); the incidence of events of grade 3 or higher was also similar in the two groups (51.4% and 49.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Enfortumab vedotin significantly prolonged survival as compared with standard chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-based treatment and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and Seagen; EV-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03474107.).

EV-101: A Phase I Study of Single-Agent Enfortumab Vedotin in Patients With Nectin-4-Positive Solid Tumors, Including Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety/tolerability and antitumor activity of enfortumab vedotin (EV), a novel investigational antibody-drug conjugate that delivers the microtubule-disrupting agent, monomethyl auristatin E, to cells that express Nectin-4. METHODS: EV-101 is a phase I dose escalation/expansion study that enrolled patients with Nectin-4-expressing solid tumors (eg, metastatic urothelial carcinoma [mUC]) who progressed on ≥ 1 prior chemotherapy regimen and/or programmed death-1 receptor/programmed death ligand-1 [PD-(L)1] inhibitor, including a cohort of patients with mUC who received prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Patients received escalating doses of EV up to 1.25 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle. Primary objectives were evaluation of safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics; antitumor activity was a secondary objective. RESULTS: Enrolled patients with mUC (n = 155) were heavily pretreated, with 96% having prior platinum-based chemotherapy and 29% receiving ≥ 3 lines of prior treatment. Maximum tolerated dose of EV was not established; however, the recommended phase II dose was identified as 1.25 mg/kg. Rash, peripheral neuropathy, fatigue, alopecia, and nausea were the most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); the most common TRAEs were grade 1-2 in severity. Among the 112 patients with mUC treated with single-agent EV 1.25 mg/kg, the investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 43%, and duration of response was 7.4 months. Median overall survival (OS) was 12.3 months, and the OS rate at 1 year was 51.8%. Similar ORR and estimated median OS were observed in patients ≥ 75 years of age with and without prior anti-PD-(L)1 treatment, liver metastases, or upper-tract disease. CONCLUSION: Single-agent EV was generally well tolerated and provided clinically meaningful and durable responses in patients with mUC; survival data are encouraging. A pivotal phase II and a confirmatory phase III study are ongoing.

A Phase 3 Study of Micafungin Versus Amphotericin B Deoxycholate in Infants With Invasive Candidiasis.

BACKGROUND: Amphotericin B deoxycholate (AmB-D) is standard of care treatment for neonatal invasive candidiasis (IC). Micafungin (MCA) has broad-spectrum fungicidal activity against Candida spp. We compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous MCA with intravenous AmB-D and assessed the pharmacokinetics of MCA in infants >2-120 days of age with proven IC in a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group, noninferiority study (NCT00815516). METHODS: Infants were randomized 2:1 to MCA (10 mg/kg/d) or AmB-D (1 mg/kg/d) for ≥21 days. Primary efficacy endpoint was fungal-free survival (FFS) 1 week after last study drug dose. MCA population pharmacokinetics included simulated area under the curve (AUC) at steady state and maximum plasma concentration after 2-hour infusion. AUC pharmacodynamic target exposure was 170 µg·h/mL. RESULTS: Thirty infants received MCA (n = 20) or AmB-D (n = 10). The trial was terminated early because of slow recruitment. FFS was observed in 12 of 20 [60%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 36%-81%] MCA-group infants and in 7 of 10 (70%; 95% CI: 35%-93%) AmB-D-group infants. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anemia [MCA: n = 9 (45%); AmB-D: n = 3 (30%)] and thrombocytopenia [n = 2 (10%) and n = 3 (30%), respectively]. Model-derived mean AUC at steady state for MCA was 399.3 ± 163.9 µg·h/mL (95% prediction interval: 190.3-742.3 µg/mL); steady state and maximum plasma concentration after 2-hour infusion was 31.1 ± 10.5 µg/mL (95% prediction interval: 17.0-49.7 µg/mL). MCA exposures were above the AUC pharmacodynamic target exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Within the study limitations, infants with IC treated with MCA achieved similar FFS compared with AmB-D. Both agents were safe and well tolerated.

Efficacy of micafungin for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidaemia in patients with neutropenia.

Neutropenia is linked to the development of invasive candidiasis/candidaemia, for which micafungin has demonstrated efficacy, but evidence in patients with neutropenia is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of micafungin for the treatment of invasive candidiasis/candidaemia in patients with neutropenia (<500 neutrophils/µL) and without neutropenia. This pooled, post hoc analysis of 2 Phase 3 trials compared micafungin 100 mg/d (adults) and 2 mg/kg/d (paediatrics) with L-AmB 3 mg/kg/d (NCT00106288) and micafungin 100 mg/d and 150 mg/d with caspofungin 70 mg/d followed by 50 mg/d (adults) (NCT00105144); treatment duration 2-4 weeks (≤8 weeks for chronic disseminated candidiasis). Effects of neutropenia duration and Candida spp. on efficacy outcomes (treatment success, clinical and mycological response) were examined. Of 685 patients, 77 had neutropenia. The most common infection in patients with/without neutropenia was due to C. tropicalis (31/77) and C. albicans (295/608) respectively. Overall success was numerically lower in patients with vs without neutropenia (63.6% vs 72.9%). Clinical and mycological response was similar between groups. Neutropenia duration or Candida spp. did not impact micafungin's overall success rate. This analysis supports evidence that micafungin is effective against invasive candidiasis/candidaemia in patients with neutropenia, irrespective of neutropenia duration or Candida spp., although overall success may be lower than in patients without neutropenia.

Micafungin in premature and non-premature infants: a systematic review of 9 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections cause excessive morbidity and mortality in premature neonates and severely ill infants. METHODS: Safety and efficacy outcomes of micafungin were compared between prematurely and non-prematurely born infants <2 years of age. Data were obtained from all completed phase I-III clinical trials with micafungin that had enrolled infants (<2 years of age) that were listed in the Astellas Clinical Study Database. Demographics, adverse events, hepatic function tests and treatment success data were extracted and validated by the Astellas biostatistical group for all micafungin-treated patients, <2 years of age, using the unique patient identifier. RESULTS: One-hundred and sixteen patients included in 9 clinical trials, 48% premature [birth weight (BW) <2500 g and/or gestational age <37 weeks], 52% non-premature, received ≥ 1 dose of micafungin. Among premature patients, 14.5% were low BW (1500-2499 g), 36.4% very low BW (1000-1499 g) and 49.1% extremely low BW (<1000 g). Ninety patients (78%) completed the studies; 13 [11% (4 premature)] died. Significantly more non-premature than premature patients discontinued treatment (P = 0.003). Treatment-related adverse events were recorded in 23% of patients with no difference between groups. More extremely low BW (n = 4, 15%) and very low BW (n = 8, 40%) infants experienced treatment-related adverse events than low BW (n = 0) and there was no relation to micafungin dose or duration. For a subgroup of 30 patients with invasive candidiasis, treatment success was achieved in 73% in both premature and non-premature groups. Prophylaxis was successful in 4/5 non-premature hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. CONCLUSION: Micafungin has a safe profile in premature and non-premature infants with substantial efficacy.

Safety and pharmacokinetic profiles of repeated-dose micafungin in children and adolescents treated for invasive candidiasis.

BACKGROUND: Micafungin is an echinocandin with proven efficacy against a broad range of fungal infections, including those caused by Candida spp. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of once-daily 3 mg/kg and 4.5 mg/kg micafungin in children with proven, probable or suspected invasive candidiasis. METHODS: Micafungin safety and pharmacokinetics were assessed in 2 phase I, open-label, repeat-dose trials. In Study 2101, children aged 2-16 years were grouped by weight to receive 3 mg/kg (≥25 kg) or 4.5 mg/kg (<25 kg) intravenous micafungin for 10-14 days. In Study 2102, children aged 4 months to <2 years received 4.5 mg/kg micafungin. Study protocols were otherwise identical. RESULTS: Safety was analyzed in 78 and 9 children in Studies 2101 and 2102, respectively. Although adverse events (AEs) were experienced by most children (2101: n=62; 2102: n=9), micafungin-related AEs were less common (2101: n=28; 2102: n=1), and the number of patients discontinuing due to AEs was low (2101: n=4; 2102: n=1). The most common micafungin-related AEs were infusion-associated symptoms, pyrexia and hypomagnesemia (Study 2101), and liver function abnormalities (Study 2102). The micafungin pharmacokinetic profile was similar to that seen in other studies conducted in children, but different than that observed in adults. CONCLUSIONS: In this small cohort of children, once-daily doses of 3 mg/kg and 4.5 mg/kg micafungin were well tolerated. Pharmacokinetic data will be combined in a population pharmacokinetic analysis to support US dosing recommendations in children.

Outcomes with micafungin in patients with candidaemia or invasive candidiasis due to Candida glabrata and Candida krusei.

OBJECTIVES: Infection with Candida glabrata and Candida krusei represents a major challenge. We sought to describe outcomes for patients with candidaemia/invasive candidiasis (C/IC) due to these pathogens who were treated with micafungin. METHODS: We pooled two randomized trials of micafungin versus comparator. We identified patients infected with either C. glabrata or C. krusei. One trial compared micafungin (100 mg/day with option for dose escalation) with liposomal amphotericin B, while the other compared micafungin (either 100 or 150 mg/day) and caspofungin (NCT00106288 and NCT00105144). Clinical cure was our primary endpoint while 28 day mortality represented a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Among 1070 subjects with C/IC, 183 were infected with either C. glabrata (n = 144) or C. krusei (n = 39). One hundred and seventeen received micafungin. Clinical cure rates in those receiving micafungin were similar to those randomized to comparator [73.5% (86/117) versus 62.1% (41/66), P = not significant]. Mortality at 28 days was also similar [29.1% (34/117) with micafungin versus 34.8% (23/66) with comparator, P = not significant]. In logistic regression, treatment agent correlated with neither cure nor mortality. Factors independently linked with lower cure rates included: IC neutropenia; higher severity of illness; and medical admission. Higher severity of illness and failure to remove a central venous catheter were associated with 28 day mortality. Crude and adjusted outcomes were comparable irrespective of micafungin dose administered. CONCLUSIONS: Micafungin results in similar outcomes to comparators for C/IC due to C. glabrata and C. krusei. The 100 mg/day dose represents an acceptable option in this setting. Patient characteristics and catheter management appear to be more important factors affecting clinical outcomes.

Early removal of central venous catheter in patients with candidemia does not improve outcome: analysis of 842 patients from 2 randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with candidemia frequently have a central venous catheter (CVC) in place, and its early removal is considered the standard of care. METHODS: We performed a subgroup analysis of 2 phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trials of candidemia to examine the effects of early CVC removal (within 24 or 48 h after treatment initiation) on the outcomes of 842 patients with candidemia. Inclusion criteria were candidemia, age >16 years, CVC at diagnosis, and receipt of 1 dose of the study drug. Six outcomes were evaluated: treatment success, rates of persistent and recurrent candidemia, time to mycological eradication, and survival at 28 and 42 days. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, early CVC removal did not improve time to mycological eradication or rates of persistent or recurrent candidemia but was associated with better treatment success and survival. These benefits were lost in multivariate analysis, which failed to show any beneficial effect of early CVC removal on all 6 outcomes and identified Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, older age, and persistent neutropenia as the most significant variables. Our findings were consistent across all outcomes and time points (removal within 24 or 48 h and survival at 28 and 42 days). The median time to eradication of candidemia was similar between the 2 study groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of 842 adults with candidemia followed up prospectively, early CVC removal was not associated with any clinical benefit. These findings suggest an evidence-based re-evaluation of current treatment recommendations.

Micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis.

BACKGROUND: Invasive candidiasis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with health care-associated infection. The echinocandins have potent fungicidal activity against most Candida species, but there are few data comparing the safety and efficacy of echinocandins in the treatment of invasive candidiasis. METHODS: This was an international, randomized, double-blind trial comparing micafungin (100 mg daily) and micafungin (150 mg daily) with a standard dosage of caspofungin (70 mg followed by 50 mg daily) in adults with candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis. The primary end point was treatment success, defined as clinical and mycological success at the end of blinded intravenous therapy. RESULTS: A total of 595 patients were randomized to one the treatment groups and received at least 1 dose of study drug. In the modified intent-to-treat population, 191 patients were assigned to the micafungin 100 mg group, 199 to the micafungin 150 mg group, and 188 to the caspofungin group. Demographic characteristics and underlying disorders were comparable across the groups. Approximately 85% of patients had candidemia; the remainder had noncandidemic invasive candidiasis. At the end of blinded intravenous therapy, treatment was considered successful for 76.4% of patients in the micafungin 100 mg group, 71.4% in the micafungin 150 mg group, and 72.3% in the caspofungin group. The median time to culture negativity was 2 days in the micafungin 100 mg group and the caspofungin group, compared with 3 days in the micafungin 150 mg groups. There were no significant differences in mortality, relapsing and emergent infections, or adverse events between the study arms. CONCLUSIONS: Dosages of micafungin 100 mg daily and 150 mg daily were noninferior to a standard dosage of caspofungin for the treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis.