TY - JOUR
T1 - Safety and efficacy of durvalumab and tremelimumab alone or in combination in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma
AU - Kelly, Ronan J.
AU - Lee, Jeeyun
AU - Bang, Yung Jue
AU - Almhanna, Khaldoun
AU - Blum-Murphy, Mariela
AU - Catenacci, Daniel V.T.
AU - Chung, Hyun Cheol
AU - Wainberg, Zev A.
AU - Gibson, Michael K.
AU - Lee, Keun Wook
AU - Bendell, Johanna C.
AU - Denlinger, Crystal S.
AU - Chee, Cheng Ean
AU - Omori, Takeshi
AU - Leidner, Rom
AU - Lenz, Heinz Josef
AU - Chao, Yee
AU - Rebelatto, Marlon C.
AU - Brohawn, Philip Z.
AU - He, Peng
AU - McDevitt, Jennifer
AU - Sheth, Siddharth
AU - Englert, Judson M.
AU - Ku, Geoffrey Y.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the patients, their families and caregivers, and the site investigators and staff for their participation in this study, and Christopher Morehouse of AstraZeneca for performing biomarker analyses. This study was funded by AstraZeneca. Medical writing support was provided by Ailsa Bennett, PhD, of SciMentum, Inc. (Nucleus Global), London, UK, and was funded by AstraZeneca.
Publisher Copyright:
©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.
PY - 2020/2/15
Y1 - 2020/2/15
N2 - Purpose: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II study assessed durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination or as monotherapy for chemotherapy-refractory gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Patients and Methods: Second-line patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm A), or durvalumab (arm B) or tremelimumab monotherapy (arm C), and third-line patients received durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm D). A tumor-based IFNγ gene signature was prospectively evaluated as a potential predictive biomarker in second- and third-line patients receiving the combination (arm E). The coprimary endpoints were objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Results: A total of 113 patients were treated: 6 in phase Ib and 107 (arm A, 27; arm B, 24; arm C, 12; arm D, 25; arm E, 19) in phase II. Overall response rates were 7.4%, 0%, 8.3%, 4.0%, and 15.8% in the five arms, respectively. PFS rates at 6 months were 6.1%, 0%, 20%, 15%, and 0%, and 12-month overall survival rates were 37.0%, 4.6%, 22.9%, 38.8%, and NA, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 17%, 4%, 42%, 16%, and 11% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Response rates were low regardless of monotherapy or combination strategies. No new safety signals were identified. Including use of a tumor-based IFNγ signature and change in baseline and on-treatment circulating tumor DNA are clinically feasible and may be novel strategies to improve treatment response in this difficult-to-treat population.
AB - Purpose: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II study assessed durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination or as monotherapy for chemotherapy-refractory gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Patients and Methods: Second-line patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm A), or durvalumab (arm B) or tremelimumab monotherapy (arm C), and third-line patients received durvalumab plus tremelimumab (arm D). A tumor-based IFNγ gene signature was prospectively evaluated as a potential predictive biomarker in second- and third-line patients receiving the combination (arm E). The coprimary endpoints were objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Results: A total of 113 patients were treated: 6 in phase Ib and 107 (arm A, 27; arm B, 24; arm C, 12; arm D, 25; arm E, 19) in phase II. Overall response rates were 7.4%, 0%, 8.3%, 4.0%, and 15.8% in the five arms, respectively. PFS rates at 6 months were 6.1%, 0%, 20%, 15%, and 0%, and 12-month overall survival rates were 37.0%, 4.6%, 22.9%, 38.8%, and NA, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 17%, 4%, 42%, 16%, and 11% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Response rates were low regardless of monotherapy or combination strategies. No new safety signals were identified. Including use of a tumor-based IFNγ signature and change in baseline and on-treatment circulating tumor DNA are clinically feasible and may be novel strategies to improve treatment response in this difficult-to-treat population.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079410465&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85079410465&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2443
DO - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2443
M3 - Article
C2 - 31676670
AN - SCOPUS:85079410465
SN - 1078-0432
VL - 26
SP - 846
EP - 854
JO - Clinical Cancer Research
JF - Clinical Cancer Research
IS - 4
ER -