Abstract CT054: Amivantamab in wild-type advanced non-small cell lung cancer after disease progression on checkpoint inhibition and chemotherapy: Results from the phase 1b CHRYSALIS study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Overexpression of EGFR and MET has been observed in wild-type (WT) adenocarcinoma and squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; Huang L. J Thorac Oncol. 2014). Amivantamab (ami), an EGFR-MET bispecific antibody with immune cell-directing activity, demonstrated pre-clinical activity against WT tumors overexpressing EGFR and MET. We examined ami monotherapy activity in WT-NSCLC after disease progression on platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy. Methods: The WT-Ad and WT-Sq cohorts of the CHRYSALIS study enrolled pateints (pts) with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma histology, respectively, without evidence of EGFR, ALK, and MET Exon 14 skipping activating mutations. Pts received ami monotherapy at the approved dose (1050 mg; 1400 mg if ≥80 kg) weekly for the first 4 weeks and biweekly thereafter. Response was assessed by the investigator per RECIST v1.1. Plasma samples were collected pre-treatment, with ctDNA analyzed by Guardant Health (Redwood City, CA). Results: In the WT-Ad cohort, 41 pts received ami (30 with ≥1 post-baseline disease assessment; 11 discontinued due to adverse events [AEs], disease progression, or physician decision), with a median follow-up of 6.2 mo. The median age was 62 years, 63% were men, and 37% were Asian. The objective response rate (ORR) was 7% (3/41), the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 29%, and the median duration of response (DoR) was 4.2 mo (95% CI, 4.1-not estimable [NE]). Among pts with detectable ctDNA (n=24), 9 pts had KRAS/HER2 mutations. The ORR for pts with and without KRAS/HER2 mutations was 0% (0/9) and 20% (3/15), respectively. The corresponding median PFS for pts with and without KRAS/HER2 mutations was 1.4 mo (95% CI, 1.4-NE) and 4.2 mo (95% CI, 1.6-NE), respectively. In the WT-Sq cohort, 14 pts received ami (12 with ≥1 post-baseline disease assessment; 2 discontinued), with a median follow-up of 6.3 mo. Median age in the WT-Sq cohort was 71 years, 57% were men, and 43% were Asian. ORR was 21% (3/14) with a median DoR that was NE and 2 pts with a DoR ≥6 mo. The overall CBR was 43% (6/14), median PFS was 4.0 mo (95% CI, 2.2-7.3), and median OS was NE. Most common treatment-emergent AEs in both cohorts were rash (grouped term; 66% for WT-Ad, 57% for WT-Sq) and infusion-related reactions (63% WT-Ad and 57% WT-Sq). Grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in 17% of pts in the WT-Ad cohort and 21% the WT-Sq cohort. One (2%) pt in the WT-Ad cohort experienced grade 2 interstitial lung disease. Four pts in WT-Ad and 2 pts in WT-Sq cohort discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Ami demonstrated preliminary antitumor activity in pts with refractory WT squamous and adenocarcinoma NSCLC, particularly in those lacking KRAS/HER2 activating mutations. Safety profile was consistent with the previously reported monotherapy experience, and no new signals were identified. Citation Format: Byoung Chul Cho, Jonathan Goldman, Natasha Leighl, Filippo De Braud, Ki Hyeong Lee, François Ghiringhelli, Pilar Garrido, Julio Peguero, Benjamin Besse, Philippe Cassier, Nicolas Girard, Maria de Miguel, Rosa Alvarez, Alastair Greystroke, Yuichiro Ohe, Te-Chun Hsia, Joshua C. Curtin, Sanjib Chowdhury, Xuesong Lyu, Grace Gao, Siyang Qu, Patricia Lorenzini, Aastha Kapoor, Priya Kim, Mahadi Baig, Meena Thayu, Roland E. Knoblauch, Sandrine Hiret, Pascale Tomasini. Amivantamab in wild-type advanced non-small cell lung cancer after disease progression on checkpoint inhibition and chemotherapy: Results from the phase 1b CHRYSALIS study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT054.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».