Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (DESTINY-Breast02): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the single-arm, phase 2 DESTINY-Breast01 trial, trastuzumab deruxtecan showed robust activity in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who were refractory or resistant to trastuzumab emtansine; a population with scarce effective treatments. In DESTINY-Breast02, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan with treatment of physician's choice in this patient population. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial was conducted at 227 sites (hospitals, university hospitals, clinics, community centres, and private oncology centres) in North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, Brazil, Israel, and Türkiye. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had unresectable or HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, previously received trastuzumab emtansine, disease progression, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate renal and hepatic function. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan (intravenously at 5·4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) or treatment of physician's choice using block randomisation. Treatment of physician's choice was either capecitabine (1250 mg/m2; orally twice per day on days 1-14) plus trastuzumab (8 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 then 6 mg/kg once per day) or capecitabine (1000 mg/m2) plus lapatinib (1250 mg orally once per day on days 1-21), with a 21-day schedule. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival based on blinded independent central review in the full analysis set. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03523585. FINDINGS: Between Sept 6, 2018, and Dec 31, 2020, 608 patients were randomly assigned to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan (n=406; two did not receive treatment) or treatment of physician's choice (n=202; seven did not receive treatment). 608 (100%) patients were included in the full analysis set. The median age was 54·2 years (IQR 45·5-63·4) in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 54·7 years (48·0-63·0) in the treatment of physician's choice group. 384 (63%) patients were White, 603 (99%) were female, and five (<1%) were male. The median follow-up was 21·5 months (IQR 15·2-28·4) in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 18·6 months (8·8-26·0) in the treatment of physician's choice group. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 17·8 months (95% CI 14·3-20·8) in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group versus 6·9 months (5·5-8·4) in the treatment of physician's choice group (HR 0·36 [0·28-0·45]; p<0·0001). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (293 [73%] of 404 with trastuzumab deruxtecan vs 73 [37%] of 195 with treatment of physician's choice), vomiting (152 [38%] vs 25 [13%]), alopecia (150 [37%] vs eight [4%]), fatigue (147 [36%] vs 52 [27%]), diarrhoea (109 [27%] vs 105 [54%]), and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (seven [2%] vs 100 [51%]). Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 213 (53%) patients receiving trastuzumab deruxtecan versus 86 (44%) receiving treatment of physician's choice; whereas drug-related interstitial lung disease occurred in 42 (10%; including two grade 5 death events) versus one (<1%). INTERPRETATION: DESTINY-Breast02 shows the favourable benefit-risk profile of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer, as previously reported in DESTINY-Breast01, and is the first randomised study to show that one antibody-drug conjugate can overcome resistance to a previous one. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca.

Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Previously Treated HER2-Low Advanced Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among breast cancers without human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) amplification, overexpression, or both, a large proportion express low levels of HER2 that may be targetable. Currently available HER2-directed therapies have been ineffective in patients with these "HER2-low" cancers. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3 trial involving patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer who had received one or two previous lines of chemotherapy. (Low expression of HER2 was defined as a score of 1+ on immunohistochemical [IHC] analysis or as an IHC score of 2+ and negative results on in situ hybridization.) Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan or the physician's choice of chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the hormone receptor-positive cohort. The key secondary end points were progression-free survival among all patients and overall survival in the hormone receptor-positive cohort and among all patients. RESULTS: Of 557 patients who underwent randomization, 494 (88.7%) had hormone receptor-positive disease and 63 (11.3%) had hormone receptor-negative disease. In the hormone receptor-positive cohort, the median progression-free survival was 10.1 months in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 5.4 months in the physician's choice group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; P<0.001), and overall survival was 23.9 months and 17.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; P = 0.003). Among all patients, the median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 5.1 months in the physician's choice group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.50; P<0.001), and overall survival was 23.4 months and 16.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; P = 0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 52.6% of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan and 67.4% of those who received the physician's choice of chemotherapy. Adjudicated, drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 12.1% of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan; 0.8% had grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer, trastuzumab deruxtecan resulted in significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than the physician's choice of chemotherapy. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca; DESTINY-Breast04 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03734029.).

Phase Ib Study of Utomilumab (PF-05082566), a 4-1BB/CD137 Agonist, in Combination with Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Purpose: This phase Ib study (NCT02179918) evaluated the safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of utomilumab, a fully human IgG2 mAb agonist of the T-cell costimulatory receptor 4-1BB/CD137 in combination with the humanized, PD-1-blocking IgG4 mAb pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.Experimental Design: Utomilumab (0.45-5.0 mg/kg) and pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg) were administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Utomilumab dose escalation was conducted using the time-to-event continual reassessment method.Results: Twenty-three patients received combination treatment with no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mostly grades 1 to 2, without any treatment-related discontinuations. Six patients (26.1%) had confirmed complete or partial responses. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of utomilumab and pembrolizumab were similar when administered alone or in combination. A trend toward higher levels of activated memory/effector peripheral blood CD8+ T cells was observed in responders versus nonresponders.Conclusions: The safety, tolerability, and clinical activity demonstrated by utomilumab in combination with pembrolizumab support further investigation in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 23(18); 5349-57. ©2017 AACRSee related commentary by Pérez-Ruiz et al., p. 5326.

Defining Clinical Response Criteria and Early Response Criteria for Precision Oncology: Current State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives.

In this era of precision oncology, there has been an exponential growth in the armamentarium of genomically targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Evaluating early responses to precision therapy is essential for "go" versus "no go" decisions for these molecularly targeted drugs and agents that arm the immune system. Many different response assessment criteria exist for use in solid tumors and lymphomas. We reviewed the literature using the Medline/PubMed database for keywords "response assessment" and various known response assessment criteria published up to 2016. In this article we review the commonly used response assessment criteria. We present a decision tree to facilitate selection of appropriate criteria. We also suggest methods for standardization of various response assessment criteria. The relevant response assessment criteria were further studied for rational of development, key features, proposed use and acceptance by various entities. We also discuss early response evaluation and provide specific case studies of early response to targeted therapy. With high-throughput, advanced computing programs and digital data-mining it is now possible to acquire vast amount of high quality imaging data opening up a new field of "omics in radiology"-radiomics that complements genomics for personalized medicine. Radiomics is rapidly evolving and is still in the research arena. This cutting-edge technology is poised to move soon to the mainstream clinical arena. Novel agents with new mechanisms of action require advanced molecular imaging as imaging biomarkers. There is an urgent need for development of standardized early response assessment criteria for evaluation of response to precision therapy.

Factors associated with early relapse to insulin dependence in unprovoked A-ß+ ketosis-prone diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Unprovoked "A-ß+" Ketosis-Prone Diabetes (KPD), a unique diabetic syndrome of adult-onset, obesity and proneness to ketoacidosis, is associated with rapid recovery of ß cell function and insulin-independence. Whereas most patients experience prolonged remission, a subset relapses early to insulin dependence. We sought to define factors associated with early relapse. METHODS: We utilized a prospective, longitudinal database to analyze 50 unprovoked A-ß+ KPD patients with >2 measurements of ß cell function and glycemia following baseline assessment. RESULTS: 19 patients (38%) relapsed to insulin dependence <1 year after the index DKA episode, while 31 (62%) remained insulin-independent for >1 year (median 4.2 years). Younger age at baseline (OR=0.947, P=0.033), and lower HOMA2-%ß (OR=0.982, P=0.001), lower HOMA2-IR (OR=0.582, P=0.046) and higher HbA1c at 1 year (OR=1.71, P=0.002) were associated with early relapse. A multivariate model with these variables and the interaction of HOMA2-%ß and HbA1c at 1 year provided a good fit (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Relapse to insulin dependence in unprovoked A-ß+ KPD patients is associated with younger age and, after 1 year, lack of robust increase in ß cell functional reserve, and suboptimal glycemic control. Measurements of these parameters 1 year after the index DKA episode can be used to assess the need for insulin therapy.

A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Saroglitazar 2 and 4 mg Compared to Pioglitazone 45 mg in Diabetic Dyslipidemia (PRESS V).

Dual PPARα/γ can improve both metabolic effects and minimized the side effects caused by either PPARα or PPARγ agonist. The PRESS V study was aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of saroglitazar 2 mg and 4 mg capsules (Lipaglyn™; Zydus Code: ZYH1) as compared to high dose pioglitazone in patients with diabetic dyslipidemia. In this 26-week double-blind, parallel arm, phase 3 study patients with hypertriglyceridemia with type 2 diabetes mellitus (BMI > 23 kg/m2; hypertriglyceridemia: TG > 200 to 400 mg/dL; glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] >7 to 9%) were enrolled from 14 sites in India. After 2 weeks of lifestyle modification, 122 patients were randomized double-blind to 24-week treatment with the study drugs (saroglitazar 2 mg or 4 mg or pioglitazone 45 mg once daily) in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary end point was change in plasma triglyceride level at week 24. The secondary end points were change in lipid profile and fasting plasma glucose at week 24. Patients who received study medication and had undergone at least 1 postbaseline efficacy evaluation were included in the efficacy analysis. All randomized patients who received at least a single dose were included for safety evaluation. The efficacy analysis included 109 patients (n = 37 in saroglitazar 2 mg; n = 39 in saroglitazar 4 mg; n = 33 in pioglitazone). Saroglitazar 2 mg and 4 mg significantly reduced (P < .001) plasma triglyceride from baseline by 26.4% (absolute change ± SD: -78.2 ± 81.98 mg/dL) and 45% (absolute change ± SD -115.4 ± 68.11 mg/dL), respectively, as compared to pioglitazone -15.5% (absolute change ± SD: -33.3 ± 162.41 mg/dL) at week 24. Saroglitazar 4 mg treatment also demonstrated marked decrease in low-density lipoprotein (5%), very-low-density lipoprotein (45.5%), total cholesterol (7.7%), and apolipoprotein-B (10.9%). Saroglitazar treatment was generally safe and well tolerated. No serious adverse events were reported in saroglitazar treatment arm and no persistent change in laboratory parameters. Saroglitazar appeared to be an effective and safe therapeutic option for improving hypertriglyceridemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.