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 Display session

97P - Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of sotorasib vs adagrasib for previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with KRAS G12C mutation

Date

28 Mar 2025

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Jürgen Wolf

Citation

Journal of Thoracic Oncology (2025) 20 (3): S1-S97. 10.1016/S1556-0864(25)00632-X

Authors

J. Wolf1, D. Chopra2, Z. Lan3, D. Waterhouse4, E. Felip5, H. Moradian3, N. Karim6, C. Obiozor2, B. Stollenwerk7

Author affiliations

  • 1 Universitätsklinikum Köln (AöR), Cologne/DE
  • 2 Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks/US
  • 3 Cytel Inc., Cambridge/US
  • 4 OHC, Cincinnati/US
  • 5 Department of Oncology, Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona/ES
  • 6 Amgen Ltd., Uxbridge/GB
  • 7 Amgen (EUROPE) GmbH, Risch-Rotkreuz/CH

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

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

Abstract 97P

Background

In the absence of head-to-head trials, a MAIC was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of sotorasib and adagrasib, the only approved KRAS G12C inhibitors for NSCLC in the United States and Europe.

Methods

MAIC compared data from phase III trials: CodeBreaK (CB) 200 (patient-level data for sotorasib) and KRYSTAL-12 (aggregate data for adagrasib). An unanchored (base-case) MAIC was preferred over anchored (sensitivity analysis), due to differential bias in comparator arm (early dropout, cross-over, protocol deviations). The MAIC adjusted for prognostic factors and effectmodifiers such as age, sex, region, prior treatment, brain metastases and liver metastases. Sensitivity analyses adjusted for additional covariates and utilized an anchored approach. Hazard ratios (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS), odds ratio (OR) for objective response rate (ORR) and safety outcomes were estimated. PFS was also evaluated in the subgroup of patients with baseline brain metastases.

Results

In the base-case, an effective sample size of 70.7% was achieved from CB 200. In the overall population, sotorasib and adagrasib showed comparable efficacy for PFS (HR: 0.93, P=0.6 and ORR (OR: 0.86, P=0.5), with no significant differences. However, in patients with brain metastases, sotorasib was associated with a 39% lower risk of systemic progression than adagrasib (HR: 0.61, P=0.04). Regarding safety, sotorasib showed better outcomes (OR, P) for any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) (0.20,

Conclusions

Sotorasib demonstrated comparable efficacy vs adagrasib in patients with advanced NSCLC, with the PFS point estimate favoring sotorasib in patients with brain metastases. Sotorasib also exhibited a favorable safety profile compared to adagrasib.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Amgen Inc.

Funding

Amgen Inc.

Disclosure

J. Wolf: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Blueprint, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Ellipses Pharma, Genmab, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, Regeneron, Roche, Seattle Genetic; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen Pharmaceutica, Novartis, Pfizer. D. Chopra: Financial Interests, Institutional, Stocks/Shares: Amgen; Other, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Amgen. Z. Lan: Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Consulting Fees: Amgen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Cytel. D.M. Waterhouse: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, AZTherapies, AbbVie, Amgen, McGivenny Global, Janssen Oncology, Seattle Genetics, Exelixis, Eisai, EMD Serono, Merck, Pfizer, Mirati Therapeutics, Regeneron, Sanofi, Lilly, Astellas, Gilead, Takeda, Daiichi, Novartis, Bayer, Aveo; Financial Interests, Institutional, Speaker’s Bureau: Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck, AstraZeneca, Amgen, EMD Serono,; Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Travel and Accommodations: Bristol Myers Squibb. E. Felip: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Role: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi, F. Hoffmann – La Roche, Gilead, GSK, Iteos Therapeutics, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Regeneron, TUR; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker, Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Medical Trends, Medscape, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Peervoice, Pfizer, Regeneron; Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Support for meetings/travel: AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche; Financial Interests, Institutional, Member, Independent Member of the board: Grifols. H. Moradian: Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Consulting Fees: Amgen; Other, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Cytel. N. Karim: Financial Interests, Institutional, Stocks/Shares: Amgen; Other, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Amgen. C. Obiozor: Financial Interests, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Amgen. B. Stollenwerk: Financial Interests, Institutional, Stocks/Shares: Amgen; Other, Institutional, Full or part-time Employment: Amgen.

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.