Biomarker-directed targeted therapy plus durvalumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 2 umbrella trial

Benjamin Besse, Elvire Pons-Tostivint, Keunchil Park, Sylvia Hartl, Patrick M. Forde, Maximilian J. Hochmair, Mark M. Awad, Michael Thomas, Glenwood Goss, Paul Wheatley-Price, Frances A. Shepherd, Marie Florescu, Parneet Cheema, Quincy S.C. Chu, Sang We Kim, Daniel Morgensztern, Melissa L. Johnson, Sophie Cousin, Dong Wan Kim, Mor T. MoskovitzDavid Vicente, Boaz Aronson, Rosalind Hobson, Helen J. Ambrose, Sajan Khosla, Avinash Reddy, Deanna L. Russell, Mohamed Reda Keddar, James P. Conway, J. Carl Barrett, Emma Dean, Rakesh Kumar, Marlene Dressman, Philip J. Jewsbury, Sonia Iyer, Simon T. Barry, Jan Cosaert, John V. Heymach

    Résultats de recherche: Contribution à un journalArticleRevue par des pairs

    8 Citations (Scopus)

    Résumé

    For patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors without currently targetable molecular alterations, standard-of-care treatment is immunotherapy with anti-PD-(L)1 checkpoint inhibitors, alone or with platinum-doublet therapy. However, not all patients derive durable benefit and resistance to immune checkpoint blockade is common. Understanding mechanisms of resistance—which can include defects in DNA damage response and repair pathways, alterations or functional mutations in STK11/LKB1, alterations in antigen-presentation pathways, and immunosuppressive cellular subsets within the tumor microenvironment—and developing effective therapies to overcome them, remains an unmet need. Here the phase 2 umbrella HUDSON study evaluated rational combination regimens for advanced NSCLC following failure of anti-PD-(L)1-containing immunotherapy and platinum-doublet therapy. A total of 268 patients received durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody)–ceralasertib (ATR kinase inhibitor), durvalumab–olaparib (PARP inhibitor), durvalumab–danvatirsen (STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide) or durvalumab–oleclumab (anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody). Greatest clinical benefit was observed with durvalumab–ceralasertib; objective response rate (primary outcome) was 13.9% (11/79) versus 2.6% (5/189) with other regimens, pooled, median progression-free survival (secondary outcome) was 5.8 (80% confidence interval 4.6–7.4) versus 2.7 (1.8–2.8) months, and median overall survival (secondary outcome) was 17.4 (14.1–20.3) versus 9.4 (7.5–10.6) months. Benefit with durvalumab–ceralasertib was consistent across known immunotherapy-refractory subgroups. In ATM-altered patients hypothesized to harbor vulnerability to ATR inhibition, objective response rate was 26.1% (6/23) and median progression-free survival/median overall survival were 8.4/22.8 months. Durvalumab–ceralasertib safety/tolerability profile was manageable. Biomarker analyses suggested that anti-PD-L1/ATR inhibition induced immune changes that reinvigorated antitumor immunity. Durvalumab–ceralasertib is under further investigation in immunotherapy-refractory NSCLC. ClinicalTrials.gov

    langue originaleAnglais
    Pages (de - à)716-729
    Nombre de pages14
    journalNature Medicine
    Volume30
    Numéro de publication3
    Les DOIs
    étatPublié - 1 mars 2024

    Contient cette citation