Abstract 143P
Background
Atezo SC (with recombinant human hyaluronidase) is approved in the EU and US in the same indications as atezo IV based on IMscin001 (NCT03735121) data. IMscin002 (NCT05171777) data show that most pts (70.7%; n=87/123) prefer atezo SC vs IV. We present exploratory analyses on this preference and its strength, for different pt subgroups from IMscin002.
Methods
Eligible pts ≥18 years old with EGFR/ALK wild-type tumors had PD-L1+ resected NSCLC (Stage II, IIIA or selected IIIB; AJCC 8th ed) with prior chemotherapy and no evidence of recurrence, or untreated PD-L1-high Stage IV NSCLC. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive atezo SC or atezo IV for 3 weeks, and switched to the alternative formulation after Cycle 3. Primary endpoint: pt preference for atezo SC or IV (or no preference), evaluated at Cycle 6 or after ≥2 consecutive administrations of each formulation in pts who discontinued before Cycle 6, via pt preference questionnaires (Question 1: preference for one formulation [or no preference]; Question 2 [exploratory analysis]: strength of preference for this formulation).
Results
At data cutoff (9 Nov 2023), 123 evaluable pts answered Question 1 (atezo SC preferred: n=87; atezo IV preferred: n=26; no preference: n=10). Of the pts who also indicated their strength of preference for atezo SC (n=87) or IV (n=25), 35.6% had a very strong preference, 50.6% had a fairly strong preference and 13.8% had a not very strong preference for atezo SC; vs 28.0%, 44.0% and 28.0% for atezo IV, respectively. Preference for atezo SC or IV in different pt subgroups is shown in the Table. These data were generally consistent with those seen in the overall population, except for pts >74 years old who showed a stronger preference for atezo SC vs IV. Table: 143P
Preference for atezo, % | |||
SC | IV | No preference | |
Age, years (n) ≤60 (34) >60–≤67 (32) >67–≤74 (33) >74 (24)* | 76.4 65.7 57.6 87.6 | 23.6 21.9 27.3 4.2 | 0 12.5 15.2 4.2 |
Sex (n) Female (39)† Male (84) | 66.6 72.6 | 23.1 19.1 | 7.7 8.3 |
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (n) 0 (60)‡ 1 (63) | 68.3 73.0 | 23.4 17.4 | 6.7 9.5 |
Disease stage (n) II–III (48) IV (75)§ | 64.6 74.7 | 25.1 17.3 | 10.4 6.7 |
Mean injection duration at Cycles 1–6, min (n) ≤6.0 (34) >6.0–≤7.0 (24) >7.0–≤8.4 (34)¶ >8.4 (31) | 70.5 54.1 79.4 74.2 | 14.7 33.4 14.7 22.6 | 14.7 12.5 2.9 3.2 |
Data shown as a % of the total number of evaluable pts who answered Questions 1 and 2 (n=123) Strength of preference missing for 1 pt who preferred atezo IV: *4.2%; †2.6%; ‡1.6%; §1.3%; ¶2.9%
Conclusions
Pts showed higher preference for atezo SC vs IV irrespective of their baseline/disease characteristics or injection administration times. A stronger preference for atezo SC vs IV was shown in older pts.
Clinical trial identification
NCT05171777.
Editorial acknowledgement
This study is sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Third party medical writing assistance, under the direction of the authors, was provided by Lietta Nicolaides, PhD of Ashfield MedComms, an Inizio company, and was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Legal entity responsible for the study
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Funding
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Disclosure
M. Majem Tarruella: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role, Consulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Helsinn Therapeutics, Takeda, Sanofi, Janssen Oncology, Pierre Fabre, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Roche; Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Helsinn Therapeutics; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Travel, Accommodations and Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD Oncology; Financial Interests, Personal, Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, AstraZeneca; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Roche, AstraZeneca . Z. Zvirbule: Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Advisory Board: GSK, AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD; Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Invited Speaker: MSD; Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Principal Investigator: Merck Sharp & Dohme Latvija, Roche, Genentech, Shanghai Henlius Biotech. E.P. Korbenfeld: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BMS, AstraZeneca, MSD, Pfizer, Knight; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: AstraZeneca; Financial Interests, Personal, Principal Investigator: Centro Oncologico; Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker, Consultant, Advisor: BMS, MSD. J. Kolb-Sielecki: Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Local PI: Warmian-Masurian Center of Pulmonary Diseases. L.A. Herraez Baranda: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd; Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks or ownership: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. A.Y. Castro Sanchez: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd; Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. A. Bustillos: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. L.X. Liu: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Genentech, Inc. F. Cappuzzo: Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Pfizer, Takeda, Lilly, Bayer, Amgen, Sanofi, PharmaMar, Novocure, Mirati, Galecto, OSE, Illumina, ThermoFisher, MSD; Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Pfizer, Takeda, Lilly, Bayer, Amgen, Sanofi, PharmaMar, Novocure, Mirati, Galecto, OSE, Illumina, ThermoFisher, MSD; Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Pfizer, Takeda, Lilly, Bayer, Amgen, Sanofi, PharmaMar, Novocure, Mirati, Galecto, OSE, Illumina, ThermoFisher, MSD.
Resources from the same session
88P - Utilisation of the ESMO-MCBS in prioritising immune-checkpoint inhibitors for a WHO model list of essential medicines application
Presenter: Mario Csenar
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
89P - Safety and efficacy of rechallenge with immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced solid tumor: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Huijun Xu
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
90P - Meta-analysis of hypophysitis incidence in melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors
Presenter: Vincas Urbonas
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
91P - Territorial disparities in the use of hospitalization at home for immune checkpoint inhibitors infusion in France between 2021 and 2022
Presenter: Anne Claire Toffart
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
92P - An investigation on the differences between the pre-treatment nutritional and immunological status of nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients and the healthy population
Presenter: Qiao He
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
93P - Pseudoprogression in immunotherapy: Illusion or reality? P-PIT study
Presenter: Amelie Toulet
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
94P - Real-world characteristics, treatments and healthcare recourse utilization (HCRU) of patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) managed with first line (1L) immuno-oncology (IO) strategies in Greece: The IO-HORIZON study
Presenter: Dimitrios Ziogas
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
95P - Quality of life (QoL) and care pathway in patients with durable response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI-DR) for advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma: QUALICI study
Presenter: Nicolas Girard
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
96P - Comparative cardiovascular risks of PD-1 vs. PD-L1 inhibitors: A meta-analysis of incidence and severity of cardiotoxicity
Presenter: Mohammedbaqer Al-Ghuraibawi
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract
97P - Cardiac risk stratification and serial monitoring during immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: Prospective real-world experience
Presenter: James Knott
Session: Poster Display session
Resources:
Abstract