Sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) plus pembrolizumab (P) versus pembrolizumab (P) as first-line treatment for PD-L1–positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results from the randomized phase 3 OptiTROP-Lung05 study.
Abstract
8506 Background: Pembrolizumab has been the standard first-line treatment for PD-L1 positive advanced NSCLC. Sac-TMT, a TROP2-directed antibody-drug conjugate with a unique bifunctional linker, and PD-1/L1 inhibitors demonstrate complementary mechanisms that enhance antitumor activity in the first-line treatment of NSCLC ( Hong et al., Nat Med, 2025 ). Here, we report the results from the planned interim analysis for PFS in this phase 3 OptiTROP-Lung05 study (NCT06448312). Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had treatment-naïve, locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC without EGFR/ ALK alterations and positive PD-L1 expression (defined as TPS ≥1%, 22C3 assay). Pts were stratified by PD-L1 (TPS 1-49% vs ≥ 50%), histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and ECOG (0 vs 1) and then randomized (1:1) to receive sac-TMT 4 mg/kg Q2W plus P 400 mg Q6W or P 400 mg Q6W. The primary endpoint was PFS per RECIST 1.1 assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR), and the key secondary endpoint was OS. Results: A total of 413 pts (median age 65 yrs; 84.5% ECOG 1; 40.0% squamous; 40.0% PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%) were randomized to receive sac-TMT + P (n = 208) or P (n = 205). As of Sep 29, 2025, the median follow-up was 10.5 months. PFS by BICR was significantly longer in the sac-TMT + P group than the P group (median, not reached vs 5.7 months; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.26-0.47; p < 0.0001). The data for OS were not mature, and a favorable trend was observed in the sac-TMT + P group (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.85). The BICR-assessed ORR was 70.2% in the sac-TMT + P group versus 42.0% in the P group. In the pre-specified PD-L1 subgroups, the HRs for PFS in pts with TPS 1-49% and TPS ≥ 50% were 0.28 (95% CI, 0.19-0.41) and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.29-0.77). In the pre-specified histology subgroups, the HRs for PFS in pts with non-squamous and squamous were 0.28 (95% CI, 0.18-0.43) and 0.44 (95% CI, 0.29-0.66). Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were 55.3% in the sac-TMT + P group and 31.4% in the P group. Most common grade ≥3 TEAEs of special interest for sac-TMT were neutrophil count decreased (17.3%), anemia (9.1%), and stomatitis (5.3%). TEAEs led to discontinuation of sac-TMT/ pembrolizumab in 3.8%/5.3% of pts in the sac-TMT + P group while discontinuation of pembrolizumab occurred in 4.9% of pts in the P group. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first phase 3 study to demonstrate the significant PFS benefit of an antibody-drug conjugate plus pembrolizumab in the first-line treatment of PD-L1 positive advanced NSCLC compared to pembrolizumab. The safety profile of sac-TMT + P was generally manageable and consistent with the safety profile of the components. No new safety signals were seen. These results from phase 3 OptiTROP-Lung05 study support sac-TMT + P as a potential new treatment option for this population. Clinical trial information: NCT06448312 .
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Caicun Zhou
Anwen Xiong
Department of Oncology, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
Wenxiu Yao
Department of Medical Oncology, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
Wei Zheng
Yan Yu
Department of Respiratory Oncology Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital Harbin China
Peng Chen
Hua Zhong
Department of Chemistry, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 3, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore
Hui Wang
Bolin Chen
Haiyong Wang
State Key Laboratory of Organic−Inorganic Composites and Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Soft Matter Science and Engineering Beijing University of Chemical Technology Beijing 100084 P.R. China
Yun Fan
Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China
Yunpeng Yang
Department of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Guangzhou, China
Xingxiang Pu
Department of Pulmonary and Gastrointestinal Medicine, Hunan Cancer Hospital/the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
Qiming Wang
Department of Internal Medicine, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University and Henan Cancer Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, Henan Academy of Innovations in Medical Science, Zhengzhou, China
Xia Song
Department of Biomedical Engineering College of Design and Engineering National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
Zhangzhou Huang
Department of Thoracic Medical Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China
Xiao-bo Du
Oncology Department, Mianyang Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Mianyang, China
Yan Qing
Xiaoping Jin
Clinical Research Center, Sichuan Kelun-Biotech Biopharmaceutical, Chengdu, China
Junyou Ge
National Engineering Research Center of Targeted Biologics, Chengdu, China