Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2445/173633
Title: Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: EAGLE, a randomized, open -label phase III study
Author: Ferris, R. L.
Haddad, R.
Even, C.
Tahara, Makoto
Dvorkin, M.
Ciuleanu, T. E.
Clement, Paul M.
Mesía Nin, Ricard
Kutukova, S.
Zholudeva, L.
Daste, Amaury
Caballero Daroqui, Javier
Keam, B.
Vynnychenko, I.
Lafond, C.
Shetty, J.
Mann, H.
Fan, Jean
Wildsmith, S.
Morsli, N.
Fayette, J.
Licitra, L.
Keywords: Càncer de coll
Càncer de cap
Metàstasi
Neck cancer
Head cancer
Metastasis
Issue Date: 1-Jul-2020
Publisher: Elsevier
Abstract: Background: Targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has demonstrated clinical benefit in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). Combining immunotherapies targeting PD-L1 and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) has shown evidence of additive activity in several tumor types. This phase III study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) or durvalumab plus tremelimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody) versus standard of care (SoC) in R/M HNSCC patients. Patients and methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 : 1 : 1 durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks [q2w]), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (durvalumab 20 mg/kg q4w plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg q4w 4, then durvalumab 10 mg/kg q2w), or SoC (cetuximab, a taxane, methotrexate, or a fluoropyrimidine). The primary end points were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab versus SoC, and OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and duration of response. Results: Patients were randomly assigned to receive durvalumab (n 1⁄4 240), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n 1⁄4 247), or SoC (n 1⁄4 249). No statistically significant improvements in OS were observed for durvalumab versus SoC [hazard ratio (HR): 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72e1.08; P 1⁄4 0.20] or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.85e1.26; P 1⁄4 0.76). The 12-month survival rates (95% CI) were 37.0% (30.9e43.1), 30.4% (24.7e36.3), and 30.5% (24.7 e36.4) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were consistent with previous reports. The most common trAEs (any grade) were hypothyroidism for durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab (11.4% and 12.2%, respectively), and anemia (17.5%) for SoC. Grade !3 trAE rates were 10.1%, 16.3%, and 24.2% for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively. Conclusion: There were no statistically significant differences in OS for durvalumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. However, higher survival rates at 12 to 24 months and response rates demonstrate clinical activity for durvalumab.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.001
It is part of: Annals of Oncology, 2020, vol. 31, num. 7, p. 942-950
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2445/173633
Related resource: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.001
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FerrisRL.pdf395.34 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons