At ESMO IO last Fall, Genentech/Roche were first past the post in 1L non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with data from their phase 3 study in non-squamous patients evaluating the combination of chemotherapy and bevacizumab plus atezolizumab versus chemotherapy alone.
The 1L NSCLC race continues apace…
Since then, there has been much anticipatory excitement for BMS and Merck’s phase 3 trials, CheckMate-227 and KEYNOTE189, respectively. These data will be now presented at the annual meeting of AACR in Chicago next month.
In the meantime, there are also the overall survival data expected soon from AstraZeneca’s MYSTIC trial – will it be positive despite a PFS miss?
Later this year, the company have another study (NEPTUNE) result expected that explores the combination of durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus platinum-based standard chemotherapy in first line treatment of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) wild-type advanced or metastatic NSCLC. This has been a controversial area for IO studies to date and the story here may well be more subtle and complex than many realise.
Next year we can also expect to see more readouts from Pfizer/EMD Serono’s JAVELIN LUNG 100 (avelumab) in both squamous and non-squamous histologies, while AstraZeneca’s POSEIDON study is in squamous patients only.
Just this week, Genentech again announced their phase 3 squamous NSCLC trial readout with positive PFS in favour of the combination of chemotherapy plus atezolizumab versus chemotherapy alone. The BMS CheckMate-227 study included both sets of histologies and no details were provided in the announcement, so hopefully this data will be available at AACR.
In Pharmaland we hear much noise around First-in-Class and Best-in-Class claims but, ultimately, it will all come down to data. In oncology, it always does.
In our latest review post, we take a look at both squamous and non-squamous settings and what we learn from the latest available information. Surprisingly, it’s quite a lot and there are important nuances to consider as well…
To learn more from thought leaders and get a heads up on our latest oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.
Geneva: At the ESMO IO 2017 conference underway in Geneva, the data of the meeting is the IMpower150 phase 3 trial data that will be presented later today by Dr Martin Reck (Grosshandsdorf).
Genentech/Roche have announced a press release ahead of the presentation (Link).
This is the first phase 3 lung cancer immunotherapy trial that combines a VEGF inhibitor (bevacizumab/Avastin), along with a PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor (atezolizumab/Tecentriq) together with chemotherapy (carboplatin plus paclitaxel).
While we’ve not seen the actual data curves yet, we spoke to Dr Dan Chen (Genentech) about what we can expect to see later today in Geneva, and importantly, we also discussed the significance of the findings from the IMpower150 study.
As Dr Chen told BSB, “this trial is a lot of firsts.”
If you have an interest in lung cancer or immunotherapy, do follow #ESMOImmuno17 on Twitter, as this is data could potentially be practice changing and have a major impact on the lung cancer treatment landscape.
To get a heads up and learn more insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.
With so much data to cover recently, we haven’t have time for a perennial favourite, the monthly mailbag to answer BSB reader Q&A on hot oncology topics.
October has brought out quite a lot of controversy to consider, most of it happening in the last week!
Here, we consider questions on Immune Design’s phase 3 trial with their NY-ESO-1 vaccine, CMB305, which attracted both a lot of market attention and also questions from readers.
We also review a bunch of questions relating to 1L NSCLC and the upcoming readouts. This niche is probably potentially one of the most competitive spaces in oncology R&D at present and readers seem almost insatiable for information on this topic.
It is quite a turnaround considering the last decade of numerous failed trials or even non-inferiority studies that were being conducted.
Like many readers, I can well remember sitting in freezing cold, half empty halls wondering if the latest chemo or targeted therapy doublet was going to offer a mere 2-3 months improvement in PFS and no OS benefit or not. It was that binary and also depressing.
With the possibilities offered by immune checkpoint blockade, in a short space of time 1L NSCLC has gone from graveyard to uber intense with several companies vying to demonstrate improvements in overall survival by 6 months or more.
There’s a lot more to come here and not all of the lung trials will be positive – that’s expecting too much against the game of chance. Here, we look at numerous factors that could make a difference, both positive and negative.
To learn more insights on this intriguing topic, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.
A decade or so ago, the annual conferences for the European Congress of Clinical Oncologists (ECCO) and European Society of Medical Oncologists (ESMO) were considered convenient dumping grounds for negative or failed trials. This was largely because they received much less attention than their big brother, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).
In the last few years, this trend has shifted with excellent clincial and scientific data being presented at both meetings – they alternate as hosts each year – under the European Cancer Congress (ECC) umbrella.
Just to confuse a global audience long used to referring to the meetings as ESMO and ECCO, while the logical Twitter hashtag might appear to be #ESMO14 and #ECCO15, respectively, based on the standard nomenclature of conference acronym followed by the year, the vagaries of European politics mean we end up with… #ECC2015.
It will be interesting to see how they compete for attention because this hashtag signal will be dirty (more than one usage) and noisy (many disparate voices) with the European Curling Championship, a European Cheerleader Convention and another on e-cigarettes and vaping, all seemingly using the same moniker!
Still, what many readers are really eager to learn though, is this a great, middling, or poor year for exciting new data in the field of cancer research and what can we expect to hear about in Vienna later this month?
To learn more insights on this intriguing topic, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.