LAPIS: Randomized phase 3 trial of chemotherapy (CTX) with and without pamrevlumab (PAM) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

V Vincent J. Picozzi (Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA) K Khurum Hayat Khan (University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom) P Pascal Hammel M Michele Reni D Daniel Lin (Childrens Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, United States) W Woo Jin Lee R Roberto A. Pazo Cid (Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet/Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Aragón (IIS Aragón), Zaragoza, Spain) V Vaibhav Sahai A Andres J Munoz Martin (Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain) J Jianjun Liu E Ende Zhao (NYU Medical Center-Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY) E Ewa Carrier (FibroGen, Inc., San Francisco, CA) T Teresa Macarulla (Vall d’Hebrón University Hospital, Vall d’Hebrón Institute of Oncology, Barcelona)

Abstract

675 Background: PAM improved response, surgical eligibility, and resection rates when combined with CTX in phase 1/2 LAPC trials (NCT01181245; NCT02210559). LAPIS (NCT03941093) evaluated efficacy and safety of PAM + CTX in unresectable LAPC. Methods: LAPIS was a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial of adults with treatment-naïve, -confirmed unresectable LAPC. Patients received (randomized 1:1) PAM (35 mg/kg Q2W) or placebo (PBO) plus CTX (gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel [GnP] or FOLFIRINOX [FFX] per standard protocol) for up to six 28-day cycles. based on changes in -9, on FDG-PET, resectability, with final surgical decision made by surgeon. Primary endpoint: overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints: event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR. Safety (including treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]) was evaluated in patients who received treatment. Results: 143 and 141 patients (median [range] age, 65.0 [31–90] yrs; 53.2% male) were randomized to PAM and PBO arms. 142 and 141 received treatment: GnP, 114 (79.7%) and 112 (79.4%); FFX, 28 (19.6%) and 29 (20.6%). PAM (64.8%) and 96 PBO (68.1%) patients completed 6 treatment cycles. . Survival similar for PAM and PBO arms (Table) and did not differ by. For PAM + FFX vs PBO + FFX, respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders (39.3% vs 27.6%) and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (53.6% vs 37.9%) occurred >10% more with PAM; TEAE frequencies were similar with PAM + GnP and PBO + GnP. One treatment-related death occurred in PAM arm. Conclusions: LAPIS contained important LAPC trial innovations: pre/post-CTX FDG-PET imaging, objective criteria for surgical intervention, external surgical review panel, and composite EFS measurement. Addition of PAM to CTX was not associated with additional toxicity but did not improve survival outcomes for unresectable LAPC. Clinical trial information: NCT03941093 . LAPIS endpoints. PAM arm (n=143) PBO arm (n=141) OS, months, median (95% CI) events=118 (82.5%)17.25 (15.47, 18.89) events=112 (79.4%)17.94 (14.59, 20.34) HR (95% CI)1.08 (0.83, 1.41)p=0.55 EFS, a months, median (95% CI) events=99 (69.2%)5.72 (5.59, 6.01) events=102 (72.3%)5.78 (5.62, 6.37) HR (95% CI)1.05 (0.78, 1.39) PFS, months, median (95% CI) events=48 (33.6%)9.36 (7.75, 11.79) events=44 (31.2%)9.40 (7.69, 10.84) HR (95% CI)1.01 (0.65, 1.56) ORR, n (%) 43 (30.1) 64 (45.4) OR (95% CI)0.50 (0.31, 0.82) Complete response 0 0 Partial response 43 (30.1) 64 (45.4) CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; OR, odds ratio. a Earliest of 1) failure to achieve local disease-free status at end of treatment and/or after surgery; 2) local or distant recurrence/progression; or 3) death.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 4_suppl
Published February 01, 2025
Pages 675-675
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (13)

V

Vincent J. Picozzi

Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA

K

Khurum Hayat Khan

University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

P

Pascal Hammel

M

Michele Reni

D

Daniel Lin

Childrens Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, United States

W

Woo Jin Lee

R

Roberto A. Pazo Cid

Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet/Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Aragón (IIS Aragón), Zaragoza, Spain

V

Vaibhav Sahai

A

Andres J Munoz Martin

Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain

J

Jianjun Liu

E

Ende Zhao

NYU Medical Center-Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY

E

Ewa Carrier

FibroGen, Inc., San Francisco, CA

T

Teresa Macarulla

Vall d’Hebrón University Hospital, Vall d’Hebrón Institute of Oncology, Barcelona