Tucatinib + subcutaneous (SC) trastuzumab (Tuc + Trast SC) in patients (pts) with solid tumors with <i>ERBB2</i> alterations (alts): Results from the targeted agent and profiling utilization registry (TAPUR) study.
Abstract
3104 Background: TAPUR is a phase II basket study evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in pts with advanced cancers with specific genomic alts. Combined results of four cohorts of pts with solid tumors with ERBB2 alts treated with Tuc + Trast SC are reported. Methods: Eligible pts had measurable disease, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment (tx) options. Genomic testing was done in CLIA-certified, CAP-accredited labs. Dosing was 300 mg of Tuc given orally twice daily, 600 mg of Trast and 10,000 units of hyaluronidase SC every 3 weeks (wks), until disease progression. Primary endpoint was disease control (DC) per investigator definition as complete (CR) or partial (PR) response or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 wks duration (SD16+) per RECIST v.1.1. The hypothesized null DC rate of 15% was rejected if the lower limit of a 1-sided 90% CI was >15%. Inferences were based on a beta-binomial model, which accounts for tumor type variance. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response (OR), duration of response, duration of SD (DOSD), and safety. Results: 78 pts (histology-pooled [n=40], lung [n=16], biliary tract [n=11], uterus [n=11]) with 21 tumor types with ERBB2 alts ( ERBB2 amplification [amp], n=38; mutation [mut], n=32; mut and amp, n=6; overexpression [OE], n=2) were enrolled. All cohorts were combined for analysis. 3 pts were not evaluable. Table shows demographics and outcomes. 1 CR (urothelial carcinoma [UC], ERBB2 mut), 6 PR (uterus [2], esophagus [1], lung, neuroendocrine [1], ovary [1], UC [1]; ERBB2 amp [5], mut [1]) and 18 SD16+ (10 tumor types; ERBB2 amp [7], mut [10], OE [1]) were observed for a DC rate of 33% (1-sided 90% CI, 27 to 100) and an OR rate of 9% (95% CI, 4 to 18). The null hypothesis was rejected. Duration of CR in 1 pt was 87 wks. Median (med) duration of PR was 12 wks (range, 6-72). Med DOSD in pts with SD16+ was 28 wks (range, 12-57). 20 pts (26%) had ≥1 grade 3 tx-related AE or SAE. All were consistent with tx label except back pain, cardiac troponin increase, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, hypomagnesemia, hypophosphatemia, pericardial and pleural effusion, peripheral motor and sensory neuropathy, sinus tachycardia, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and UTI. Conclusions: Tuc + Trast SC demonstrated antitumor activity in pts with advanced solid tumors with ERBB2 alts, warranting additional study. Clinical trial information: NCT02693535 . Demographics (N=78) and efficacy outcomes (n=75). Med age, years (range) 67 (39, 88) ECOG PS, No. (%) 0 29 (37) 1 44 (56) 2 5 (6) Prior systemic regimens, No. (%) 0-2 43 (55) ≥3 35 (45) DC (OR plus SD16+) rate, % (1-sided 90% CI), p-value 33 (27, 100) OR rate, % (95% CI) 9 (4, 18) Med PFS, wks (95% CI) 10 (8, 16) Med OS, wks (95% CI) 44 (30, 55)
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Tareq Al Baghdadi
4Trinity Health IHA medical group, Ypsilanti, United States
Michael Rothe
Institute of Experimental Hematology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer
ASCO, Alexandria, VA
Funda Meric-Bernstam
Kathryn Finch Mileham
Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Charlotte, NC
Roozbeh Mohajer
Sutter Cancer Research Consortium, Palo Alto, CA
Chukwuemeka Ikpeazu
University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL
Mehmet Akce
O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL
Andrew Gregory
2Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, United States
Laura LaNiel Tenner
University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE
Raymond Couric Wadlow
Inova Schar Cancer Institute, Fairfax, VA
Olatunji B. Alese
Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Stephanie Ann Dublis
CWH Lemmen Holton, Wyoming, MI
David Michael Gill
Intermountain Health, Salt Lake City, UT
Jared David Acoba
University of Hawai`i Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI
Abigail Gregory
ASCO, Alexandria, VA
Dominique C. Hinshaw
Gina N. Grantham
ASCO, Alexandria, VA
Susan Halabi
From the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda (A.B.A., N.S., S.N., L.L., L.C.), the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore (J.H.-C.), and the Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville (H.S., E.S.) — all in Maryland; the Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (K.V.B., M.O., C.M., G.P.B.); AdventHealth Cancer Institute and the University of Central Florida, Orlando (G.S.); Dana–Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, Boston (S.B., B.M.); UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill (W.Y.K.), and Duke University Medical Center and Duke Cancer Institute, Durham (J.H., S.H.) — both in North Carolina; the University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood (R.P.); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (M.Y.T., M.J.M., J.E.R.), and Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo (G.C.) — both in...
Richard L. Schilsky
ASCO, Alexandria, VA