Abstract 913
Background
The primary APACT analysis showed no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS) by blinded, independent radiologic review with nab-P/G vs G in patients (pts) with surgically resected pancreatic cancer (PC). However, investigator-assessed DFS (prespecified sensitivity analysis) and interim overall survival (OS; secondary endpoint) trended in favor of nab-P/G. Here, we report interim OS exploratory subanalyses.
Methods
Treatment-naive pts with histologically confirmed PC, macroscopic complete resection (R0/R1), CA 19-9 < 100 U/mL, and ECOG PS 0 or 1 were enrolled. Stratification factors included resection (R0/R1), lymph node (LN) status (positive [+]/negative), and geographic region. Pts were treated ≤ 12 weeks after surgery with nab-P 125 mg/m2 + G 1000 mg/m2 or G 1000 mg/m2 alone on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for 6 cycles. For the primary endpoint assessment, independent reviewers received only baseline clinical data and scans. OS and safety were secondary endpoints. Ten prespecified subanalyses were performed.
Results
866 pts were randomized. Median age was 64 y (range, 34–86); most were male (56%) and white (78%) and had ECOG PS 0 (60%), LN+ status (72%), and R0 resection (76%). At the original data cutoff (31 December 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 mo), median OS (interim) trended in favor of nab-P/G vs G (40.5 vs 36.2 mo; HR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 - 0.996; nominal P = 0.045). Pts with poor characteristics had numerically longer median OS with nab-P/G vs G: 32.5 vs 27.0 mo in pts with R1 resection (n = 105 and 100) and 33.8 vs 28.9 mo in pts with LN+ status (n = 311 and 312). This is consistent with the median OS observed with nab-P/G vs G in pts whose tumors were < 1 mm to the closest margin (32.5 vs 29.7 mo; n = 114 and 112). Pts with both R1 resection and LN+ status had numerically longer median OS with nab-P/G vs G (30.7 vs 24.9 mo; n = 87 and 83).
Conclusions
Final OS data may clarify the role for adjuvant nab-P/G. Interim OS analyses suggest that continued investigation of adjuvant nab-P/G for pts with suboptimally resected PC or who may not tolerate FOLFIRINOX is warranted.
Clinical trial identification
NCT01964430.
Editorial acknowledgement
Rebecca Tweedell, MediTech Media, Ltd, funded by Celgene Corporation.
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Celgene Corporation.
Disclosure
M.A. Tempero: Advisory / Consultancy: AbbVie, Inc., Advance Medical, Inc., BioPharm Communications, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Eisai, Inc., Ignyta, Inc., Pharmacyslics, LLC., Pharmcyte Biotech, Tocagen, Inc., Immunovia, CPRIT, AstraZeneca. M. Reni: Research grant / Funding (self): Celgene, Baxalta, Merck Serono, Helsinn; Non-remunerated activity/ies: Celgene, Baxalta, Merck Serono, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novocure, Halozyme, Novartis, Shire. H. Riess: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Celgene, Roche, Shire; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene, Shire. E.M. O’Reilly: Honoraria (self), Research grant / Funding (institution): Celgene Corporation; Research grant / Funding (self): ActaBiologica, Agios, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, BMS, Casi, Exelixis, Genentech, Halozyme, Incyte, Lilly, Mabvax, Novartis, OncoQuest, Polaris Puma, QED, Roche. S. Krishnamurthi: Non-remunerated activity/ies, Research Funding: Taiho, CytomX, Regeneron, Celgene, AbbVie. P. Österlund: Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Bayer; Celgene; Eisai; Lilly; Merck Serono; Roche; Sanofi; Servier/Shire; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Prime Oncology; Research grant / Funding (institution): Amgen (Inst); Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst); Celgene (Inst); Lilly (Inst); Merck Serono (Inst); MSD (Inst); Nordic Drugs (Inst); Roche (Inst); Sanofi (Inst); Servier (Inst); Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AbbVie, Pierre Fabre. M. Milella: Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca, EUSA Pharma. S. Siena: Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen, Bayer, BMS, CheckmAb, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Incyte, Merck, Novartis, Roche-Genentech, and Seattle Genetics. J. Tabernero: Advisory / Consultancy, Personal Financial Interest: Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Genentech, Inc., Genmab A/S, Halozyme, Imugene Limited, Inflection Biosciences Limited, Ipsen, Kura Oncology, Lilly, MSD, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Merus, Molecular Part. E. Van Cutsem: Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer, Lilly, Roche, Servier, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Novartis, AstraZeneca; Research grant / Funding (self): Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Novartis, Roche, Celgene, Ipsen, Merck, Merck KGaA, Servier, Bristol-Myers Squibb. P.A. Philip: Research grant / Funding (self): Celgene, Bayer, and Incyte; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche, Sanofi, and Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene Corporation. D. Goldstein: Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Celgene Corporation, Pfizer. J.D. Berlin: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Celgene Corporation. M. Li: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Celgene Corporation. S. Ferrara: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Celgene Corporation. Y. Le Bruchec: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Celgene Corporation. D. McGovern: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Celgene Corporation. A. Biankin: Leadership role: Gene Forward Inc; Research grant / Funding (self): Celgene, AstraZeneca; Licensing / Royalties: Agilent; Honoraria (self): Celgene, AstraZeneca, Tusk, Astar; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Celegene, AstraZeneca, Roche; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Celgene, AstraZeneca, Tusk, Astar, Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
4732 - Progesterone Receptor Isoform Ratio Dictates Antiprogestins/Progestins Effects on Metastatic Breast Cancer Models
Presenter: Maria Abascal
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5737 - PAM50 and CGH-array genomic characterization of HER2-Equivocal Breast Cancers defined by the 2018 ASCO/CAP recommendations.
Presenter: Carine Ngo
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1096 - OncotypeDX® predictive nomogram for recurrence score output: a machine learning system based on quantitative immunochemistry analysis - ADAPTED01
Presenter: Fabio Marazzi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5426 - Geriatric parameters predict both disease-related and patient-reported outcomes in older patients with breast cancer
Presenter: Willeke van der Plas-Krijgsman
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5865 - Patients with a 21-gene assay in South East London differ from the TAILORx trial population
Presenter: Charalampos Gousis
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1312 - Predictive tools in adjuvant breast cancer – what is the standard of evidence supporting their utility? A literature review examining validation of Adjuvant!, Cancermath and NHS Predict
Presenter: Alice Loft
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2445 - Oncologic outcome of invasive lobular carcinoma: Is it different from that of invasive ductal carcinoma?
Presenter: Hee Jun Choi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2476 - Pathologic response and survival efficacy in patients with initial nodal involvement after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer
Presenter: SERAFIN MORALES Murillo
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3761 - Chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea: prognostic impact on premenopausal Egyptian patients with breast cancer
Presenter: Khaled Abdel Karim
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4687 - Predicting the presence of breast cancer using circulating small RNA in the serum
Presenter: Yumiko Koi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract