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
4600 - Patterns and outcomes related to rapid progressive disease in a cohort of advanced solid tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).
Presenter: Lucio Ghiglione
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3547 - Real World Outcomes of Immune-Related Adverse Events (irAEs) among Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) in Hospital Settings
Presenter: Saby George
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1124 - Sex-based heterogeneity of efficacy of anticancer immunotherapy
Presenter: Fabio Conforti
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4133 - Comparative efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis
Presenter: Qingyuan Huang
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2548 - Excess weight and efficacy of anti-PD-1 antibodies in advanced cancer patients
Presenter: Jacobo Rogado
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2228 - Safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 inhibitor ABBV-181 in lung and head and neck carcinoma
Presenter: Antoine Italiano
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2333 - Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of advanced solid tumours in octogenarian patients
Presenter: Soraya Mebarki
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4847 - Association of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor therapy with overall survival (OS) in stage IV melanoma treated with targeted therapies
Presenter: Aracelis Torres
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2215 - Clinical outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in older and younger patients with advanced solid tumours in a real-life setting
Presenter: Pauline Corbaux
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2881 - Impact of corticosteroids and antibiotics on efficacy of immune-checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer
Presenter: Joaquin Mosquera Martinez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract