Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster session 01

746P - Phase III MIRASOL trial: Updated overall survival results of mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) vs. investigator’s choice chemotherapy (ICC) in patients (pts) with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) and high folate receptor-alpha (FRα) expression

Date

14 Sep 2024

Session

Poster session 01

Topics

Tumour Site

Ovarian Cancer

Presenters

Lan Gardner Coffman

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2024) 35 (suppl_2): S544-S595. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1592

Authors

L. Gardner Coffman1, B. You2, E.P. Hamilton3, Y. Garcia Garcia4, K.N. Moore5, D. Sonnenburg6, G. Scambia7, S. Derio8, J. Thomes Pepin9, D. Klasa-Mazurkiewicz10, J. Tromp11, S. Breuer12, S. Weroha13, O. Sukhina14, Y. Wang15, J.J. Stec16, T. Van Gorp17

Author affiliations

  • 1 Gynecology Oncology, Hillman Cancer Center University of Pittsburgh, 15260 - Pittsburgh/US
  • 2 Oncology Department, Lyon Sud Hospital Center - HCL, 69495 - Pierre-Bénite/FR
  • 3 Drug Development Unit, Sarah Cannon Research Institute-Cancer Centre, 37203 - Nashville/US
  • 4 Medical Oncology Department, Parc Taulí Hospital Universitari. Institut d'Investigació i Innovació Parc Taulí (I3PT), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and GEICO, 08208 - Sabadell/ES
  • 5 Department Of Obstetrics And Gynecology University, Stephenson Cancer Center/University of Oklahoma, 73104 - Oklahoma City/US
  • 6 Gynecology Oncology, Community Health Network, Inc.,, 46250 - Indianapolis/US
  • 7 Women, Children And Public Health Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS and MITO, 00168 - Rome/IT
  • 8 Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) and MaNGO, 20141 - Milan/IT
  • 9 Gynecology Oncology, Minnesota Oncology, 55404 - Minneapolis/US
  • 10 Gynecology Oncology, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-210 - Gdansk/PL
  • 11 Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC - Vrije University Medical Centre (VUmc) and DGOG, 1081 HV - Amsterdam/NL
  • 12 Oncology, Hadassah Ein Kerem, Sharett, 99999 - Jerusalem/IL
  • 13 Gynecology Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 55905 - Rochester/US
  • 14 Radiation Oncology Department, Institute of Medical Radiology and Oncology named after S. P. Grigoriev, 61024 - Kharkiv/UA
  • 15 Biostatistics, ImmunoGen, Inc., 02451-1477 - Waltham/US
  • 16 Medical Affairs, ImmunoGen Inc., 02451 - Waltham/US
  • 17 Department Of Gynaecology - Division Of Gynaecological Oncology, University Hospital Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute/BGOG, 3000 - Leuven/BE

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 746P

Background

In the primary analysis of the MIRASOL trial, MIRV demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and overall survival (OS), over ICC in patients (pts) with high-grade serous PROC (Moore K et al. N Engl J Med 2023;389:2162-74) with a median follow-up time of 11.2 months. Here, we report updated nonanalytical results based on a median follow-up of 16.7 months.

Methods

453 PROC pts with high FRα expression (VENTANA FOLR1 [FOLR1-2.1] RxDx Assay) with 1-3 prior therapies were randomized 1:1 to MIRV 6 mg/kg, adjusted ideal body weight, Day 1 of a 21-day cycle or ICC: paclitaxel (PAC), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), or topotecan (Topo). The primary efficacy endpoint was PFS by an investigator, with key secondary endpoints ORR, OS, and patient-reported outcomes in hierarchical order; other endpoints included safety, tolerability, and duration of response.

Results

With an extended data cutoff of October 27, 2023, the mPFS was 5.6 months (95% CI 4.3, 6.0) for MIRV vs 4.0 months (95% CI 2.9, 4.5) for ICC with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 (95% CI 0.53, 0.80). The mOS was 16.5 months (95% CI 14.4, 19.9) for MIRV and 13.3 months (95% CI 11.4, 15.4) for ICC with a HR of 0.67 (95% CI 0.53, 0.85). The adverse event (AE) profile of MIRV was consistent with prior reports and included: blurred vision (MIRV 43% vs ICC 2%; grade 3+ 8% vs 0), keratopathy (MIRV 33% vs. ICC 0; grade 3+ 9% vs 0), abdominal pain (MIRV 31% vs ICC 15%; grade 3+ 3% vs 1%), fatigue (MIRV 30% vs ICC 25%; grade 3+ 2% vs 5%), diarrhea (MIRV 29% vs ICC 17%; grade 3+ 1% vs <1%). Compared with ICC, MIRV was associated with lower rates of grade 3+ treatment-emergent AEs (43% vs. 54%), serious AEs (25% vs. 33%), and discontinuations due to TEAEs (10% vs. 16%). 5% of pts on the MIRV arm remained on study drug vs <1% on the IC arm.

Conclusions

With a median follow-up of 16.7 months, MIRV demonstrated improved efficacy vs ICC in pts with PROC. The efficacy data, along with the well-characterized safety profile, supports MIRV as the standard of care for pts with FRα positive PROC. Clinical Trial Information: NCT04209855.

Clinical trial identification

NCT04209855.

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

ImmunoGen, Inc.

Funding

ImmunoGen, Inc.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.