Eribulin Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (ENHANCE 1): A Phase Ib/II Study.

PURPOSE: As monotherapies, eribulin (chemotherapy) and pembrolizumab (immunotherapy) have shown promise for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This phase Ib/II study examined eribulin plus pembrolizumab as a potential mTNBC treatment in first-line and later-line settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase Ib/II study, eligible patients had mTNBC, measurable disease, and ≤2 prior systemic anticancer therapies in the metastatic setting. Patients were enrolled by number of prior systemic anticancer therapies (stratum 1: 0 vs stratum 2: 1-2) in the metastatic setting and further analyzed by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression status. All patients received intravenous eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 8, plus intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1, of 21-day cycles. The primary objectives were the safety, tolerability, and objective response rate (ORR) of this combination. RESULTS: The study included 167 patients (phase Ib, n = 7; phase II, n = 160). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (66%), nausea (58%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (41%), alopecia (40%), and constipation (37%). ORRs were 25.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15.8-38.0] for stratum 1 (n = 66) and 21.8% (95% CI: 14.2-31.1) for stratum 2 (n = 101). Patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (combined positive score ≥1) had numerically higher ORR than those with PD-L1-negative tumors, particularly in stratum 1 [stratum 1: 34.5% (95% CI: 17.9-54.3) vs 16.1% (95% CI: 5.5-33.7); stratum 2, 24.4% (95% CI: 12.9-39.5) vs 18.2% (95% CI: 8.2-32.7)]. CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin plus pembrolizumab was generally well tolerated and showed promising antitumor activity in mTNBC. Efficacy outcomes appeared influenced by line of therapy and PD-L1 status.

Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab or Everolimus for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab or everolimus has activity against advanced renal cell carcinoma. The efficacy of these regimens as compared with that of sunitinib is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and no previous systemic therapy to receive lenvatinib (20 mg orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks), lenvatinib (18 mg orally once daily) plus everolimus (5 mg orally once daily), or sunitinib (50 mg orally once daily, alternating 4 weeks receiving treatment and 2 weeks without treatment). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as assessed by an independent review committee in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Overall survival and safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1069 patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (355 patients), lenvatinib plus everolimus (357), or sunitinib (357). Progression-free survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (median, 23.9 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.49; P<0.001) and was longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (median, 14.7 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.88; P = 0.005) but was not longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.50; P = 0.30). Grade 3 or higher adverse events emerged or worsened during treatment in 82.4% of the patients who received lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab, 83.1% of those who received lenvatinib plus everolimus, and 71.8% of those who received sunitinib. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurring in at least 10% of the patients in any group included hypertension, diarrhea, and elevated lipase levels. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than sunitinib. (Funded by Eisai and Merck Sharp and Dohme; CLEAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02811861.).

Phase 2 Study of Dose-Dense Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Eribulin Mesylate With or Without Prophylactic Growth Factor for Adjuvant Treatment of Early-Stage Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin has significantly improved overall survival for patients with metastatic breast cancer who received ≥ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens for advanced disease. This trial assessed eribulin as adjuvant therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, stage I to III breast cancer received doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 provided intravenously on day 1 of each 14-day cycle for 4 cycles, with pegfilgrastim on day 2, followed by 4 cycles of eribulin mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 provided intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. There were 2 cohorts, as follows: cohort 1: no prophylactic growth factor with eribulin (allowed at physician's discretion only); cohort 2: prophylactic filgrastim with eribulin. The primary end point was feasibility, defined as the percentage of patients who completed the eribulin portion of the regimen without a dose omission, delay, or reduction due to an eribulin-related adverse event. Relative dose intensity of eribulin and toxicities are summarized by cohort. Exploratory end points included 3-year disease-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients (cohort 1, n = 55; cohort 2, n = 26) entered the treatment phase; 88% completed treatment. Feasibility was 72.9 % (90% confidence interval, 60.4, 83.2) in cohort 1 and 60.0% (90% confidence interval, 41.7, 76.4) in cohort 2. The most frequent eribulin-related adverse events (all grades) were fatigue (75.9%), peripheral neuropathy (54.4%), nausea (39.2%), neutropenia (35.4% [31.5% of patients in cohort 1; 44.0% in cohort 2]), and arthralgia (26.6%). CONCLUSION: The primary end point of > 80% feasibility was not met. No unexpected adverse events were observed, and 62% of patients received full dosing with no dose delay or reduction. Further investigation of this regimen with alternative dosing schedules or use of growth factors could be considered.