ETCTN 10483: Phase Ib trial of erdafitinib (E) combined with enfortumab vedotin (EV) following platinum and PD-1/L1 inhibitors for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) with FGFR3/2 genetic alterations (GAs).

R Rohit K. Jain (Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY) F Faustine Ong (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL) B Bishoy Morris Faltas (Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY) S Scott T. Tagawa (Weill Cornell Medical Center, NewYork Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY) D Di Maria Jiang (Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada) J Jazlyn Heiligh (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL) S Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain Naqvi (Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL) Y Youngchul Kim L Lorraine Cheryl Pelosof (National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Rockville, MD) Y Yuanquan Yang (Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH) L Laura Graham (University of Colorado, Aurora, CO) W Waddah Arafat (Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX) T Timothy Walter Synold (City of Hope Beckman Research Institute, Duarte, CA) M Monica Sheila Chatwal (Johnson & Johnson, Tampa, FL) J Jingsong Zhang J Jus Chadha (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL) G Guru P. Sonpavde (AdventHealth Cancer Institute Orlando, Orlando, FL)

Abstract

808 Background: Erdafitinib (E) is an approved treatment in patients with mUCwith FGFR 3 GAs after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) is approved to treat patients with mUC following prior PBC and PD1/L1 inhibitors or as First-line therapy in combination with pembrolizumab. Retrospective studies suggest that the activity of EV is not compromised by FGFR 3/2 GAs. EV and erdafitinib have different mechanisms of activity and toxicities are mostly non-overlapping. Hence, there is rationale to evaluate the feasibility of combination EV and E, to overcome the difficulties of resistance and sequencing agents in mUC patients with FGFR 3/2 GAs. Methods: This is an ongoing, single arm, multicenter, Phase I, 3+3 design dose-escalation and expansion study of E+ EV combination evaluating the safety, tolerability, PK, and antitumor activity in patients with mUC harboring FGFR3/2 GAs who have progressed after platinum and/or PD1/L1 inhibitor therapies. Dose escalation phase aims to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of EV in combination with fixed dose of E at 8 mg/day (table). Results: As of data cutoff, 9 patients were enrolled and completed dose limiting toxicity (DLT) period (1 st cycle) in the dose-escalation phase. Six patients were enrolled at DL1 with 1 DLT (skin rash) and 3 at DL2 (no DLT). The most common all grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included hyperphosphatemia (88%), mucositis (88%), high AST (88%), hypercalcemia (75%), palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (75%), peripheral neuropathy (75%), alopecia (63%), diarrhea (63%), hypoalbuminemia (63%) and hypomagnesemia (63%). Grade 3 TRAEs included palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (50%), anemia (17%), rash (17%), anorexia (17%) and paronychia (17%). One patient developed grade 4 Stevens-Johnson syndrome related to EV which subsequently improved. PK data are available for all 6 patients in DL1. The average steady-state Cmin of E and MMAE was 1430 ± 639 ng/mL and 1.4 ± 0.9 ng/ml, respectively, and the average Cmax of MMAE was 3.9 ± 0.9 ng/mL at DL1. All 9 patients are evaluable with 100% best objective rate, including 8 partial responses (PRs) and 1 complete response (CR). The mOS was NR (95% 17.1 months-NR), mPFS was 7.52 months (95% CT 5.55-NR) with median follow up of 22.7 months. The mDOR is 5.49 months. The RP2D of EV is 1.25 mg/kg in combination with E at 8 mg/day. Conclusions: E+EV combination is feasible and preliminarily exhibits promising antitumor activity. Dose expansion is ongoing at RP2D dose of EV with E. Clinical trial information: NCT04963153 . Dose Level (DL) Dose Cycle Length E EV Level -1 8 mg PO QD 0.75 mg/kg IV (maximum dose 75 mg) D1,8,15 28 days Level 1 8 mg PO QD 1 mg/kg IV (maximum dose 100 mg) D1,8,15 Level 2 8 mg PO QD 1.25 mg/kg IV (maximum dose 125 mg) D1,8,15

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 5_suppl
Published February 10, 2025
Pages 808-808
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (17)

R

Rohit K. Jain

Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY

F

Faustine Ong

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL

B

Bishoy Morris Faltas

Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY

S

Scott T. Tagawa

Weill Cornell Medical Center, NewYork Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY

D

Di Maria Jiang

Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

J

Jazlyn Heiligh

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL

S

Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain Naqvi

Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL

Y

Youngchul Kim

L

Lorraine Cheryl Pelosof

National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Rockville, MD

Y

Yuanquan Yang

Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH

L

Laura Graham

University of Colorado, Aurora, CO

W

Waddah Arafat

Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

T

Timothy Walter Synold

City of Hope Beckman Research Institute, Duarte, CA

M

Monica Sheila Chatwal

Johnson & Johnson, Tampa, FL

J

Jingsong Zhang

J

Jus Chadha

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL

G

Guru P. Sonpavde

AdventHealth Cancer Institute Orlando, Orlando, FL