| Literature DB >> 35816951 |
S Rao1, G Anandappa2, J Capdevila3, L Dahan4, L Evesque5, S Kim6, M P Saunders7, D C Gilbert8, L H Jensen9, E Samalin10, K-L Spindler11, S Tamberi12, A Demols13, M G Guren14, D Arnold15, M Fakih16, T Kayyal17, M Cornfeld18, C Tian18, M Catlett18, M Smith18, J-P Spano19.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Locally advanced or metastatic squamous carcinoma of the anal canal (SCAC) has poor prognosis following platinum-based chemotherapy. Retifanlimab (INCMGA00012), a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting programmed death protein-1 (PD-1), demonstrated clinical activity across a range of solid tumors in clinical trials. We present results from POD1UM-202 (NCT03597295), an open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase II study evaluating retifanlimab in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic SCAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age had measurable disease and had progressed following, or were ineligible for, platinum-based therapy. Retifanlimab 500 mg was administered intravenously every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by independent central review. Secondary endpoints were duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.Entities:
Keywords: INCMGA00012; PD-(L)1 inhibitor; anal cancer; clinical trial; phase II; retifanlimab
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35816951 PMCID: PMC9463376 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100529
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ESMO Open ISSN: 2059-7029
Patient demographics and baseline characteristics (N = 94)
| Characteristic | Values |
|---|---|
| Age, median (range), years | 64 (37-94) |
| ≥65, | 46 (48.9) |
| ≥75, | 10 (10.6) |
| Female, | 61 (64.9) |
| Race, | |
| White | 72 (76.6) |
| Black | 1 (1.1) |
| Other | 15 (16.0) |
| Missing | 6 (6.4) |
| ECOG PS, | |
| 0 | 39 (41.5) |
| 1 | 55 (58.5) |
| M1 staging, | 76 (80.9) |
| Most common sites of metastases, | |
| Lymph nodes | 61 (64.9) |
| Liver | 39 (41.5) |
| Lung | 31 (33.0) |
| Known HIV-positive status, | 9 (9.6) |
| HPV status, | |
| Positive | 54 (57.4) |
| Negative | 4 (4.3) |
| Unknown | 36 (38.3) |
| Hypercalcemia at baseline, | 11 (11.7) |
| Prior therapy, | |
| Radiotherapy (no sensitizing chemotherapy) | 16 (17.0) |
| Chemoradiation therapy | 69 (73.4) |
| Platinum-based therapy | 91 (96.8) |
ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HPV, human papillomavirus.
Includes ‘not available’, ‘not reported’, and ‘not collected’ from sites in France and Norway.
Not reported.
Followed by chemotherapy.
Three patients had protocol-defined exclusions (hearing loss, myelodysplastic syndrome, and platinum intolerance).
Objective response by ICR (N = 94)
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Objective response rate (95% CI), % | 13.8 (7.6-22.5) |
| Best overall response, | |
| Complete response | 1 (1.1) |
| Partial response | 12 (12.8) |
| Stable disease | 33 (35.1) |
| Progressive disease | 43 (45.7) |
| Not evaluable | 5 (5.3) |
| Disease control rate (95% CI), % | 48.9 (38.5-59.5) |
CI, confidence interval; ICR, independent central radiographic review.
Figure 1(A) Best percentage change from baseline in target lesion size (sum of diameters) for individual patients,a and (B) percentage change from baseline over time in sum of longest diameter of target lesions in responders and patients with SD.
Confirmed best objective response is shown for each patient in the figure. Upper limit of dotted line indicates criteria for PD (≥20% increase in sum of target lesion diameters), and lower limit indicates criteria for PR (≥30% decrease in sum of target lesion diameters).
CR, complete response; DCR, disease control rate; ICR, independent central radiographic review; PD, progressive disease; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease.
aOut of 94 patients enrolled in the study, 7 patients are not shown as they had missing baseline or postbaseline target lesion assessments.
Figure 2Duration of treatment and best objective responsesa by ICR according to RECIST version 1.1 (full analysis set). Confirmed best objective response is shown for each patient in the figure.
ICR, independent central radiographic review.
aOut of 94 patients enrolled in the study, 5 patients are not shown, as they had missing postbaseline target lesion assessments.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier estimate of (A) progression-free survival and (B) overall survival.
CI, confidence interval; NE, not estimable; Q4W, every 4 weeks.
Summary of immune-related adverse events (regardless of attribution to treatment) (N = 94)
| Immune-related adverse events, | Any grade | Grade ≥3 |
|---|---|---|
| 24 (25.5) | 6 (6.4) | |
| Hypothyroidism | 8 (8.5) | 0 |
| Hyperthyroidism | 4 (4.3) | 0 |
| Pruritus | 4 (4.3) | 0 |
| Pneumonitis | 3 (3.2) | 1 (1.1) |
| Rash maculopapular | 2 (2.1) | 1 (1.1) |
| Acute kidney injury | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) |
| Adrenal insufficiency | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) |
| Colitis | 1 (1.1) | 0 |
| Dermatitis | 1 (1.1) | 0 |
| Interstitial lung disease | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) |
| Myositis | 1 (1.1) | 0 |
| Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome | 1 (1.1) | 0 |
| Rash | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.1) |
| Rash erythematous | 1 (1.1) | 0 |