INAVO120: Phase III trial final overall survival (OS) analysis of first-line inavolisib (INAVO)/placebo (PBO) + palbociclib (PALBO) + fulvestrant (FULV) in patients (pts) with <i>PIK3CA</i> -mutated, hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2–), endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancer (aBC).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
1003 Background: INAVO, a highly potent and selective PI3Kα inhibitor that also promotes mutated p110α degradation, is FDA-approved in combination with PALBO + FULV for PIK3CA -mutated, HR+, HER2–, endocrine-resistant aBC, based on the primary analysis of INAVO120 (NCT04191499), which showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful investigator-assessed progression-free survival (INV-PFS) benefit in the INAVO arm vs. the PBO arm (hazard ratio 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32–0.59; p < 0.0001). At that analysis, interim OS results were immature. Here we report the final OS analysis, including updated efficacy and safety. Methods: Pts received INAVO (9 mg orally once daily [PO QD]; Days 1–28 of each 28-day cycle)/PBO + PALBO (125 mg PO QD; Days 1–21 of each cycle) + FULV (500 mg intramuscularly; Cycle 1 Days 1 and 15 then every ~4 weeks). OS and objective response rate (ORR) were formally tested; updated INV-PFS and safety analyses are descriptive. Results: Data cut-off was Nov 15, 2024, at 34.2 months (mo) of median follow-up. Median OS was 34.0 mo (95% CI = 28.4–44.8) in the INAVO arm and 27.0 mo (95% CI = 22.8–38.7) in the PBO arm (stratified hazard ratio 0.67; 95% CI = 0.48–0.94; p = 0.0190 [boundary = 0.0469]). The OS benefit was consistent across key subgroups. The survival probability at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30 mo was 96.8%, 87.0%, 74.3%, 65.8%, and 56.5% in the INAVO arm and 90.1%, 76.7%, 67.2%, 56.3%, and 46.3% in the PBO arm. ORR was 62.7% (95% CI = 54.8–70.2) and 28.0% (95% CI = 21.3–35.6), respectively (p < 0.0001). Median time to chemotherapy (TTC) was 35.6 mo (95% CI = 25.4–not reached) in the INAVO arm and 12.6 mo (95% CI = 10.4–16.1) in the PBO arm (stratified hazard ratio 0.43; 95% CI = 0.30–0.60). Updated median INV-PFS was 17.2 mo (95% CI = 11.6–22.2) in the INAVO arm and 7.3 mo (95% CI = 5.9–9.2) in the PBO arm (stratified hazard ratio 0.42; 95% CI = 0.32–0.55), with landmark analyses supporting durable benefit. 90.7% of pts in the INAVO arm and 84.7% in the PBO arm had grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs); there were no new grade 5 AEs; 63.4% and 13.5% experienced any-grade hyperglycemia (grouped term); and AEs led to INAVO and PBO discontinuation in 6.8% and 0.6% of pts, respectively. Conclusions: INAVO + PALBO + FULV demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS benefit compared with PBO + PALBO + FULV. Improvement in INV-PFS was maintained during longer follow-up, along with a substantial and statistically significant improvement in ORR. TTC was also substantially delayed (by ~2 years) by the addition of INAVO to PALBO + FULV. With longer exposure to INAVO, no new safety signals, nor changes in the safety profile, were noted, supporting good tolerability (reflected in low discontinuation due to AEs). Clinical trial information: NCT04191499 .
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 | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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 ».