Abstract 3246
Background
Erda, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor recently received accelerated US FDA approval for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) in adult patients (pts) with FGFR2/3 alterations who progressed on ≥ 1 prior platinum-containing chemotherapy, based on a single-arm phase 2 study. In the absence of head-to-head studies, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was used to compare the efficacy of erda relative to available therapies in mUC pts.
Methods
Systematic literature review was performed to identify published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 2nd-line treatments (from 1990-on) in mUC pts with unknown FGFR status. Individual patient-level data (IPD) were used from the phase 2 study (NCT02365597) in mUC pts treated with erda (8 mg/day). ORR (primary endpoint), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using an unanchored MAIC. The IPD were weighted to match the aggregated data from comparator studies.
Results
Nine relevant RCTs of 6 comparators (docetaxel [D], vinflunine [V], pembrolizumab [Pb], atezolizumab [A], paclitaxel [P], and mixed-chemotherapy [D, V or P]) that were identified could be matched with. The matching-adjusted odds ratios (OR) for ORR were consistently >1 vs all comparators, suggesting higher ORR with erda treatment over all comparator 2nd-line therapies. The matching-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and PFS vs all comparators were <1, suggesting better outcomes (PFS/OS) with erda. Results from the sensitivity analyses showed varied statistical significance, however, the overall trends were relatively similar. Study limitations: availability of comparable endpoints and baseline characteristics; small sample size of the erda study.Table:
926P MAIC results for base case scenario: Erda (in FGFR+ pts) vs available 2nd-line therapies in pts with unknown FGFR status
| Comparator | Study | N (Neff) | ORR (OR [95% CI]) | OS (HR [95% CI]) | PFS (HR [95% CI]) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pembrolizumab | NCT02256436 | 79 (40) | 2.26 [1.11; 4.59]* | 0.61 [0.37; 0.99]* | 0.77 [0.58; 1.03] |
| Atezolizumab | NCT02302807 | 74 (45) | 6.80 [3.55; 13.02]*** | 0.58 [0.37; 0.92]* | |
| Mixed-chemotherapy | NCT02256436 | 79 (45) | 4.15 [2.04; 8.46]*** | 0.54 [0.35; 0.85]** | 0.77 [0.56; 1.07] |
| Mixed-chemotherapy | NCT02302807 | 74 (51) | 6.26 [3.37; 11.63]*** | 0.54 [0.34; 0.84]** | |
| Docetaxela | NCT01282463 | 68 (45) | 3.71 [1.11; 12.35]* | 0.72 [0.41; 1.25] | 0.51 [0.32; 0.80]* |
| Docetaxel | NCT00880334 | 78 (42) | 3.98 [1.48; 10.74]** | 0.52 [0.31; 0.87]* | 0.84 [0.56; 1.26] |
| Docetaxel | NCT01780545 | 84 (47) | 6.02 [2.48; 14.63]*** | 0.37 [0.23; 0.61]*** | |
| Docetaxel | NCT02426125 | 78 (63) | 3.46 [1.80; 6.66]** | 0.63 [0.47; 0.84]* | |
| Vinfluninea | NCT00315237 | 78 (53) | 4.74 [2.21; 10.18]*** | 0.57 [0.39; 0.84]** | |
| Vinflunine | NCT01830231 | 61 (32) | 1.51 [0.45; 5.10] | 0.49 [0.24; 0.99]* | 0.96 [0.51; 1.81] |
| Paclitaxela | NCT00949455 | 68 (44) | 2.63 [1.03; 6.73]* | 0.59 [0.37; 0.95]* | 0.95 [0.64; 1.41] |
p ≤ 0.05;
**p ≤ 0.01;
***p ≤ 0.0001
For most comparators, only the main characteristics (according to clinical experts; number of risk factors, ECOG, liver metastases, hemoglobin<10g/dl, visceral disease, liver/bone metastasis, metastatic disease, primary tumor site, smoking status, and time since prior therapy) were included in the base case matching process to maintain a reasonable effective sample size (Neff). aAll available characteristics were included. When type of ORR (assessment by independent review committees [IRR] or assessment by investigators) is not specified for the comparator study, IRR was used for erda as this leads to conservative results.
Conclusions
Treatment of FGFR+ mUC pts with erda may be associated with improved overall response, PFS and OS as compared to available therapies in pts with unknown FGFR status.
Clinical trial identification
NCT02365597.
Editorial acknowledgement
Priya Ganpathy, MPharm, ISMPP CMPP™ (SIRO Clinpharm Pvt. Ltd, India) provided writing assistance and Harry Ma, PhD (Janssen Global Services) provided additional editorial support.
Legal entity responsible for the study
Janssen Research & Development, LLC.
Funding
Janssen Research & Development, LLC.
Disclosure
Y. Loriot: Honoraria (self), Consultancy / Advisory Role- Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Roche, Ipsen, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi; Research Funding- Sanofi (Inst) S. Van Sanden: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee and stockholder: Janssen Research & Development. J. Diels: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee and Share holder: Janssen Reserach & Development. N. Rahhali: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee and stockholder: Janssen Research & Development. D. Seshagiri: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee & stockholder: Janssen Reserach & Development. B. Kowalski: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee & stockholder: Janssen Research & Development. S. Fleming: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee & stockholder: Janssen Research & Development. P. De Porre: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Employee & stockholder: Janssen Research & Development. A.O. Siefker-Radtke: Consulting / Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, EMD Serono, Genentech, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, NCCN; Speakers’ Bureau: Genentech; Research funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Michael, Sherry Sutton; Fund for Urothelial Cancer: NIH, Takeda; Patents / Royalties / Other Intellectual Property: Methods of characterizing and treating molecular subsets of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Resources from the same session
5043 - Comprehensive results of a Phase Ib study with a HER2/neu B-cell peptide vaccine administered with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine chemotherapy show safety, immunogenicity and clinical response in patients with HER2/Neu overexpressing advanced gastric cancer
Presenter: Ursula Wiedermann
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4506 - Single intravenous preoperative administration of the oncolytic virus Pexa-Vec to prime anti-tumor immunity
Presenter: Adel Samson
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1631 - Randomized phase 2 clinical trial of NY-ESO-1 protein vaccine combined with cholesteryl pullulan (CHP-NY-ESO-1) in resected esophageal cancer patients
Presenter: Shinichi Kageyama
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4244 - T cell repertoire sequencing reveals dynamics of response to dendritic cell vaccine plus dasatinib for checkpoint blockade resistant metastatic melanoma
Presenter: Luca Quagliata
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5791 - Ixovex, a novel oncolytic E1B-mutated adenovirus
Presenter: Mohiemen Anwar
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4170 - Anti-CSPG4 DNA vaccination as a promising strategy for the treatment of CSPG4+ tumors: a comparative oncology trial
Presenter: Federica Riccardo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5780 - Antitumor activity, immunogenicity and safety of a novel PD-1 vaccine in combination with two chimeric HER-2 peptide vaccine in syngeneic Balb/c, C57Bl/6 models and in beagle dogs
Presenter: Pravin Kaumaya
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5860 - Maternal immunization against ALK as a weapon to fight neuroblastoma
Presenter: Giuseppina Barutello
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4720 - Phase 1 study evaluating safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of ABBV-428, first-in-class mesothelin (MSLN)-CD40 bispecific, in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors
Presenter: Jason Luke
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5717 - Anti-PD-L1/IL-15 fusion protein generates robust adaptive immune gene signatures in tumors leading to tumor inhibition and memory responses
Presenter: Stella Martomo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract