Clinical lung cancer · 2025
Savolitinib Plus Osimertinib in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated, MET-Amplified Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Phase II trial.
СтатьяКлиническое исследование II фазыРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang James Chih-Hsin, Chen Yuh-Min, Batra Ullas, Do Kien Hung, Sitthideatphaiboon Piyada, Danchaivijitr Pongwut, Lee Kang-Yun, Chindaprasirt Jarin, Yang Cheng-Ta, Chang Gee-Chen, Charoentum Chaiyut, Ungtrakul Teerapat, Moran Juan Ignacio Hernandez, Hartmaier Ryan, Igwegbe Ike, Gont Alexander, Haskins Matthew, Xu Wanning, Riess Jonathan W
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: MET amplification is the most common resistance mechanism to first-line osimertinib. We report safety and efficacy data from a phase II study assessing savolitinib plus osimertinib in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated, MET-amplified, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EGFR-mutated, MET-amplified (MET gene copy number ≥ 5 or MET:CEP7 ratio ≥ 2), advanced NSCLC post-osimertinib were enrolled. Patients received savolitinib 300 mg once daily (QD) plus osimertinib 80 mg QD or savolitinib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory analysis included retrospective efficacy assessment by higher MET cutoffs (immunohistochemistry 3+ staining ≥ 90% tumor cells and / or MET gene copy number ≥ 10).
RESULTS: Thirty patients were randomized (14 savolitinib-osimertinib; 16 savolitinib-placebo). Among all patients, ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 57% (29-82) versus 13% (2-38); median PFS (95% CI) was 7.4 months (5.6-not calculable [NC]) versus 1.6 months (1.3-4.1) for savolitinib-osimertinib and savolitinib-placebo, respectively. In patients with higher MET cutoffs, ORR was 63% (24-91) and 29% (4-71); median PFS was 8.2 months (4.1-NC) and 4.0 months (1.3-NC) for savolitinib-osimertinib (n = 8) and savolitinib-placebo (n = 7), respectively. There were no new safety signals. This study was terminated early and the contribution of osimertinib to savolitinib is being assessed further in SAVANNAH (NCT03778229) in patients with higher MET biomarker cutoffs.
CONCLUSIONS: Savolitinib plus osimertinib demonstrated numerically higher clinical activity versus savolitinib plus placebo in all patients and patients with higher MET biomarker cutoffs.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EGFR-mutated, MET-amplified (MET gene copy number ≥ 5 or MET:CEP7 ratio ≥ 2), advanced NSCLC post-osimertinib were enrolled. Patients received savolitinib 300 mg once daily (QD) plus osimertinib 80 mg QD or savolitinib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory analysis included retrospective efficacy assessment by higher MET cutoffs (immunohistochemistry 3+ staining ≥ 90% tumor cells and / or MET gene copy number ≥ 10).
RESULTS: Thirty patients were randomized (14 savolitinib-osimertinib; 16 savolitinib-placebo). Among all patients, ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 57% (29-82) versus 13% (2-38); median PFS (95% CI) was 7.4 months (5.6-not calculable [NC]) versus 1.6 months (1.3-4.1) for savolitinib-osimertinib and savolitinib-placebo, respectively. In patients with higher MET cutoffs, ORR was 63% (24-91) and 29% (4-71); median PFS was 8.2 months (4.1-NC) and 4.0 months (1.3-NC) for savolitinib-osimertinib (n = 8) and savolitinib-placebo (n = 7), respectively. There were no new safety signals. This study was terminated early and the contribution of osimertinib to savolitinib is being assessed further in SAVANNAH (NCT03778229) in patients with higher MET biomarker cutoffs.
CONCLUSIONS: Savolitinib plus osimertinib demonstrated numerically higher clinical activity versus savolitinib plus placebo in all patients and patients with higher MET biomarker cutoffs.