nuove prospettive terapeutiche nel trattamento …nuove prospettive terapeutiche nel trattamento...
TRANSCRIPT
Nuove Prospettive Terapeutiche nel trattamento della paziente
con ca. mammella HER2+
P Pronzato
Torino, 3.10.2014
AIOM – CIPOMORETI ONCOLOGICHE PIEMONTE E LIGURIA
MBC: Survival Over Time/ HER2+
S Dawood, JCO 2010
HER2 positivity
N of Receptors
[TITLE]
Activation of HER2 pathway
RCTs
[TITLE]
Adjuvant
• Estimation of the Residual Risk
• Estimate the Benefit (and the Risk) of a Toolable to Reduce the Risk of Clinically RelevantEvents (lifethreatening; within the Life Horizon)
• Estimate the impact for pts not included in the RCTs (very low risk of relapse; high risk of CVD)
• The Overall Best vs The Personalized Best
Risk Estimation (Relapse)
I Vas-Luiz, JCO 2014
Without CT or T5-yr DDFI 93% T1a
and 94% T1b
With CT +/- T5-yr DDFI 100% T1a
and 94% T1b
Risk Estimation (Relapse)
I Vas-Luiz, JCO 2014
Without CT or T5-yr DDFI 96% T1a
and 94% T1b
With CT +/- T5-yr DDFI 100% T1a
and 96% T1b
Risk Estimation (Cardiotoxicity)
E de Azambuja, JCO 2014
Risk Estimatiom (Cardiotoxicity)
M Chavez Mac Gregor, JCO 2013
Risk Estimation (Cardiotoxicity)
J Ajello Bowles, JNCI 2012
Overall Best vs Personalized Best
S Tolaney, SABCS 2013
Overall Best vs Personalized Best
S Tolaney, SABCS 2013
A New Scenario with SC Trastuzumab
The (Breast) Med Oncol DH Points
• Acknowledgment
• Increasing Numbers (HER2+)
• Crowding
• Little Time for «Communication»
• High Clinical Risk
• Costs (HER2+)
Q&A (Patients & Caregivers)
• What about a new tool ensuring
– SC instead of IV
– Less Time in Hospital
• Good! Provided that efficacy and safety be the same or better!
PrefHer: A global, randomised, two-cohort cross-over preference study
Includes optional TaM sub-study in both cohorts* Remaining Herceptin administered by IV infusion unless patients participated in SID self-administrationIV, intravenous; PINT, Patient Interview; R, randomised; SC, subcutaneous; SID, single-use injection device; TaM, time-and-motion Pivot X, et al. Lancet Oncol 2013
Handheld syringe cohortSC handheld syringe
every 3 weeks x 4
IV
every 3 weeks x 4
SC handheld syringe
every 3 weeks x 4
IV
every 3 weeks x 4
HerceptinRemaining Herceptin
SC to complete 18 cycles in total
HER2-positive primary invasive
breast adenocarcinoma
(N = 240)
R
1:1
PINT1 PINT2
Cross-over period
HER2-positive primary invasive
breast adenocarcinoma
(N = 248)
R
1:1
SID
every 3 weeks x 4
IV
every 3 weeks x 4
SID
every 3 weeks x 4
IV
every 3 weeks x 4
Herceptin
SID cohort
Remaining Herceptinto complete
18 cycles in total
PINT1 PINT2
Cross-over period
Arm A
Arm B
Arm A
Arm B
PrefHer: Patients overwhelmingly preferred Herceptin SC over IV(evaluable ITT population)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Arm ASID→IVn = 117
Arm BIV→SIDn = 119
OverallN = 236
Percen
tag
e o
f p
ati
en
ts
IV No preference
n = 112 95.7%
n = 54.3% n = 0
0%
n = 119.2%
n = 104 87.4%
n = 43.4%
n = 166.8%
n = 216 91.5%
n = 41.7%
Pivot X, et al. Lancet Oncol 2013SC preferred (exact binomial): Overall = 91.5% (95% CI 87.2% to 94.7%)IV, intravenous; SC, subcutaneous; SID, single-use injection device
SC
PrefHer
• In PrefHer, patients very strongly preferredTrastuzumab SC using the SID or hand-held syringe,mainly because
– it saved time,
– caused them less pain/discomfort and was moreconvenient than IV administration
Q&A (Health Professionals)
• What about new tool ensuring
– To Spare Money
– Time Become Available for more FruitfulOperations
• Good! Provided that efficacy and safety be the same or better!
Items(Taken for granted pts Preference and
Advantages for the DH)
• Subcutaneous Administration
• Fixed Dose
• Lack of Loading Dose
• Efficacy and Safety
– Short vs Long Term
• Surrogacy for pCR
• Immunogenicity
FEC500/75/500
HER2-positive
EBC (N=596)
Safety, tumour response pCR Safety, EFS, OS
PK
Follow-up: 60 mo*(24 mo for EFS, OS)
trastuzumab IV
trastuzumab SC
Su
rg
ery
trastuzumab SCFixed dose of 600 mg(5 mL over 5 minutes)
trastuzumab IV8 mg/kg loading dose;6 mg/kg maintenancedose
Docetaxel75 mg/m2
R
1:1
1 year (18 cycles) trastuzumab
Primary endpoint
Show non-inferiority of SC vs. IV based on co-primary endpoints PK: observed trastuzumab Ctrough pre-dose Cycle 8 (pre-surgery) Efficacy: pathological complete response (pCR) in the breast
Randomised, open-label, Phase III, non-inferiority study to compare the PK, efficacy and safety of trastuzumab SC and IV in HER2-positive EBC
pCR, pathological complete response EFS, event-free survival; OS, overall survival Ismael G, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:869-78
* Clinicaltrial.gov NCT00950300
Graphical elaboration from text data
HannaH: Non-inferiority margins for co-primary endpoints
Ismael G, et al. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13:869–878
Pharmacokinetic co-primary endpoint:
Observed Ctrough at pre-dose Cycle 8
Prespecified non-inferiority marginfor geometric mean ratio SC vs. IV: 0.8
Efficacy co-primary endpoint:
Pathological complete response in the breast
Pre-specified non-inferiority marginfor pCR rate difference SCIV: 12.5%
HannaH: Primary and secondary pharmacokinetic endpoints
Pharmacokinetic per protocol population20 µg/mL is the therapeutic target threshold Ismael G, et al. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13:869–878
Ismael G, et al. Lancet Oncol 2012
Efficacy per protocol population; pathological tumour response was assessed locallypCR defined as absence of invasive neoplastic cells in the breastResidual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is acceptable for pCRCI, confidence interval; IV, intravenous; pCR, pathological complete response; SC, subcutaneous; tpCR, total pathological complete response (pCR in breast and axilla)
Herceptin IV (n=263) Herceptin SC (n=260)
Pati
en
ts a
ch
ievin
g a
pC
R(%
)
45.4
34.2
39.240.7
20
10
0
30
pCR tPCR
40
50
60
HannaH: pCR and tpCR rates
SC versus IV (Hannah & Prefer)
• Comparable Drug Exposure– Higher Ctrough & Lower Cmax for SC; Comparable
Exposure
• Comparable Efficacy– Not Correlated with Body Weight
• Comparable Safety Profile– Not Correlated with Body Weight
Items(Taken for granted pts Preference and
Advantages for the DH)
• Subcutaneous Administration
• Fixed Dose
• Lack of Loading Dose
• Efficacy and Safety
– Short vs Long Term
• Surrogacy for pCR
• Immunogenicity
HER2+ MBC
New Anti-HER2 Agents: First Line
S Swain, Lancet Oncology 2013
New Anti-HER2 Agents: Second Line
S Verma, NEJM 2012
New Anti-HER2 Agents: Beyond Second Line
IE Krop, Lancet Oncology 2014
• Aims of treatment of HER2+ MBC are the same as for HER2-
• Established/ Evidence Based First and Second Line
• Long Post-Progression Survival
• Sequential treatments as a Paradigm
Survival and Sequences: PPS after First Line
M Bonotto, Oncologist 2014
Survival and Sequences
DES Seah, J NCCN 2014
[TITLE]
Presented By Eric P. Winer, MD at 2013 Breast Cancer Symposium
4444
1st line Docetaxel + T+ Pertuzumab T-DM1
2nd line T-DM1 Lapatinib + Capecitabine
3rd line Lapatinib + Capecitabine Lapatinib + Trastuzumab
4th line Lapatinib + Trastuzumab Trastuzumab + Chemo
New Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Targeted Agents to Early and Metastatic Disease? – Martin J. Piccart-Gebhart, Jules Bordet Institute Optimizing the use of new HER2 targeted agents in advanced disease:
No known brain metastasesTrastuzumab (T) naive or T-
“sensitive” population (adj. T-free interval ≥ 1y)
Trastuzumab (T) pretreatedand doubt about T-
“sensitivity”(adj. T-free interval < 1 y)
*ASCO 2013: Education Session , Now What? Do We Optimize the Use of New Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Targeted Agents to Early and Metastatic Disease? – Martin J. Piccart-Gebhart, Jules Bordet Institute
[TITLE]
Presented By Eric P. Winer, MD at 2013 Breast Cancer Symposium
Adjuvant TCNS mtsDFISubgroups
Prior PertuzumabSubgroups
Role of LapatinibCT Alone
Lapatinib:Robustness of Results
RR PFS (*TTP) OS
EGF 151 (NEJM 2006/ Oncologist 2010)
22% *8.4 mos 87.3 wks
EAP (Ann Oncol 2009) - 21.1 wks 39.6 wks
EMILIA (NEJM 2012) 30.8% 6.4 mos 23 mos
CEREBEL (ESMO 2012) 27% 6.6 mos 22.7 mos
Neratinib randomized PhaseII Trial (SABCS 2011)
40% 6.8 mos 19.7 mos
Results for the Capecitabine + Lapatinib
HER2+ Role of Chemotherapy
Role of Combination in the Real Life
A Llombart-Cusac, ASCO 2014
Role of HT
S Johnston, JCO 2009
Role of HT
Table 1Adjusted PFS curves for patients with high HR expression receiving maintenance endocrine therapy (solid line), not receiving maintenance endocrine therapy (dashed line) and for patients with HR low/absent expression (dotted line)
F Montemurro, Cancer 2011
Neoadjuvant
Neoadjuvant Trials with Pertuzumab
Neoadjuvant Trials with Pertuzumab
ER+ and/or PgR + (%)
Operable(%)
Inflammatory(%)
Ref
NEOSPHERE 47-48 60-63 5-9 Schneeweiss,SABCS 2011
TRYPHAENA 46-53 63-72 5-7 Gianni,Lancet Oncol 2012
Lessons From Neoadjuvant Trials
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsTrials
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsTrials: Anti-HER2 Agents
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsTrials: CT
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsHigh pCR Rate
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsRelevance of Pertuzumab
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsLonger CT
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsWithout CT
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Lessons From Neoadjuvant TrialsRelevance of HR
Trial CT weeks Anti HER2
ypT0/is(%)
ypT0/is(%)HR+
ypT0/is(%)HR-
NEOSPHERE T 12 H 29.0 20.0 36.8 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 P 24.0 17.4 30.0 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE T 12 HP 45.8 26.0 63.2 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
NEOSPHERE no 12 HP 16.8 5.9 27.3 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2012
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP 61.6 46.1 79.4 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA FEC/T 18 HP* 57.3 48.5 65.0 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
TRYPHAENA TC 18 HP 66.2 50.0 83.7 Scheneeweiss, Ann Oncol 2013
(*) HP started after FEC
Conclusions
Clinical Needs- Personalization
• More potent treatment for Trastuzumab resistent
– Basing on specific mechanism of resistance
• Differentiated approaches for pts TrastuzumabCured
– Selecting the cases not needing treatment
– Different «lower profile» approaches : less CT, dualblockade, anti-HER2 + HT, different anti-HER2 agents
The Way to explore IntratumorHeterogeneity
• Consider the limits of Tumor Characterization• Consider the limits of newer and future drugs
• The «Old» paradigm about uncurability of advanced disease resists!
• Exploit the Neo-Adjuvant Setting• Value for Liquid Biopsy
Activation of HER2 pathway
Intrinsic Subtypes in Untreated HER2+ Disease (n=265)
Presented By Lisa Carey at 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting
pCR by Intrinsic Subtype (All Arms, n=265)
Presented By Lisa Carey at 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting
Residual Disease Before and After Therapy<br />(n=78 pairs)
Presented By Lisa Carey at 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting
Rexer BN, Artega CL; Crit Rev Oncog, 2012
Biomarkers Studies in Pertuzumab Trials (NEOSPHERE, TRYPHAENA, CLEOPATRA)
Extensively Studied
HER2 level of Expression
HER3
IGFR
PI3K (expression an mutations)
PTEN
MYC
…….
Predictive Effect only forHR
IMMUNE PROFILE
Tumor Evolution as a Paradigm:HER2+ and anti-HER2 Sensitivity
(Pertuzumab + Trastuzumab)
Treatment Stage ORR (%) cCR (%) pCR (%) Ref
PT LABC/EBC 67.6 - 18 Gianni,Lancet Onc 2013
PT+ Doce LABC/EBC 88.1 - 49 Gianni, Lancet Onc 2013
PT+FECPac LABC/EBC 91.8 59.7 61.6* TRYPHAENA,SABCS 2011
PT+ CarboPac LABC/EBC 89.6 40.3 66.2* TRYPHAENA,SABCS 2011
PT+Doce MBC 1 line 80.2 5.5 - Baselga,NEJM 2011
The Way to explore IntratumorHeterogeneity
Consider the limits of Tumor Characterization
Consider the limits of newer and future drugs
The «Old» paradigm about uncurability of advanceddisease resists!
Exploit the Neo-Adjuvant Setting
Value for Liquid Biopsy