Abstract 1201P
Background
Retrospective, single-institution study accessing the efficacy of TEMCAP regiment in pts. with advanced, unresectable progressive GEP-NET as a first or further lines after initial disease progression. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS), as initial with/without SST analogues previous therapy, PFS as second or further lines therapy using locally evaluation according to RECIST 1.1. Secondary goals: PFS in different subgroups and overall survival (OS).
Methods
54 pts with advanced unresectable, progressive GEP-NET. Mean age 58.0 (SD+/-12.4). All histological confirmed NETs: G1 n=10, G2 n=31, G3 n=13. Standard therapy approach using TEMCAP in all subjects. Disease status and treatment efficiency were evaluated according to localization of primary, initial vs. second or further line systemic therapy, bulky (>25% of liver volume) vs. not bulky liver disease, male vs. female, BMI ≤24 or BM I>24. Standard KM method used to assess PFS and OS for all subjects and in different subgroups. Cox regression model to assess any significant covariates of PFS and OS.
Results
Pancreatic (panNET) n=32, midgut n=8; hindgut n=7 and 7 pts with CUP. PFS for all group 8.0 months (IQR 5.0-15.0), OS from initial diagnosis of GEP-NET 56.8 months (IQR 25.3-96.5); panNET n=32 -PFS=8.0 months (IQR 5.0-16.1), non-pancreas (n=22) PFS=6.2 (IQR 4.0-10.0), n.s. Initial therapy with TEMCAP n=24- PFS=9.2 (6.0-15.0) vs. second or further therapy n=30, PFS=6.0 (IQR 4.1-9.9) n.s. Bulky liver disease (n=31) PFS=7.9 (IQR 5.0-10.0) v.s. non-bulky liver disease (n=23) PFS=7.4 (IQR 4.4-17.0) n.s. Male (n=20) PFS=9.0 (IQR 5.7-15.0), vs. female (n=34) PFS=6.5 (IQR 5.0-11.5), n.s. Median BMI >24.0 PFS=7.0 (IQR 5.0-10.9), vs BMI≤24 PFS=9.0 (IQR 9.0-15.0), n.s. Cox Regression model did not find any significant predictor of improvement in PFS. In Cox regression model of OS indicated that high grade NET (G3) had HR=2.92 (CI 1.17-17.2) of death.
Conclusions
TEMCAP in real world data seems to be a good option in advanced, progressive GEP-NET with PFS=8 months, independently from the primary site, sex, BMI, liver involvement and previous therapy. Overall potential benefits in OS is seen in NETG1 or G2, but not in G3 with HR=2,92.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1197P - Somatostatin analogs or active surveillance in sporadic non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors
Presenter: Maria Grazia Maratta
Session: Poster session 13
1198P - Phase Ib portion of the ACTION-1 phase Ib/3 trial of RYZ101 in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) progressing after 177Lu somatostatin analogue (SSA) therapy: Safety and efficacy findings
Presenter: Jonathan Strosberg
Session: Poster session 13
1199P - MAVERIC: Phase II randomized study of everolimus as maintenance therapy for metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (mNEN) with pulmonary or gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) origin. Results on behalf of the GOIRC
Presenter: Lorenzo Antonuzzo
Session: Poster session 13
1200P - A phase II single-arm interventional trial evaluating the activity and safety of CABOzantinib (CBZ) plus TEMozolomide (TMZ) in lung and gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) progressed after SSA therapy, everolimus, sunitinib or PRRT: CABOTEM Trial
Presenter: oOttavia Clemente
Session: Poster session 13
1202P - Final analysis of TENEC trial: A phase II trial of temozolomide (TMZ) as second-line treatment for advanced neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) in patients (pts) with a poor performance status (PS)
Presenter: Claudia von Arx
Session: Poster session 13