Edelman Martin J, Dvorkin Mikhail, Laktionov Konstatin, Navarro Alejandro, Juan-Vidal Oscar, Kozlov Vadim, Golden Gil, Jordan Odette, Deng C Q, Bentsion Dmitriy, Chouaid Christos, Dechev Hristo, Dowlati Afshin, Fernández Núñez Natalia, Ivashchuk Olexandr, Kiladze Ivane, Kortua Tsira, Leighl Natasha, Luft Aleksandr, Makharadze Tamta, Min YoungJoo, Quantin Xavier
Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
State Budgetary Healthcare Institution of Omsk Region, Omsk, Russia.
Lung Cancer. 2022 Apr;166:135-142. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2022.03.003. Epub 2022 Mar 4.
INTRODUCTION: Topotecan is approved as second-line treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Irinotecan is also frequently used given its more convenient schedule and superior tolerability. Preclinical studies support disialoganglioside (GD2) as an SCLC target and the combination of dinutuximab, an anti-GD2 antibody, plus irinotecan in this setting. We tested dinutuximab/irinotecan versus irinotecan or topotecan as second-line therapy in relapsed/refractory (RR) SCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with RR SCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 were randomized 2:2:1 to receive dinutuximab 16-17.5 mg/m intravenous (IV)/irinotecan 350 mg/m IV (day 1), irinotecan 350 mg/m IV (day 1), or topotecan 1.5 mg/m IV (days 1-5) in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR; complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]), and clinical benefit rate (CBR; CR + PR + stable disease). Safety/tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 471 patients were randomized to dinutuximab/irinotecan (n = 187), irinotecan (n = 190), or topotecan (n = 94). Age, sex, performance status, prior therapies, and metastatic disease sites were similar between groups. Survival and response rates were not improved for patients receiving dinutuximab/irinotecan versus those receiving irinotecan or topotecan (median OS 6.9 vs 7.0 vs 7.4 months [p = 0.3132]; median PFS 3.5 vs 3.0 vs 3.4 months [p = 0.3482]; ORR confirmed 17.1% vs 18.9% vs 20.2% [p = 0.8043]; and CBR 67.4% vs 58.9% vs 68.1% [p = 0.0989]), respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events (≥5% receiving dinutuximab/irinotecan) included neutropenia, anemia, diarrhea, and asthenia. CONCLUSIONS: Dinutuximab/irinotecan treatment did not result in improved OS in RR SCLC versus irinotecan alone. Irinotecan administered every 21 days demonstrated comparable activity to topotecan administered daily × 5 every 21 days. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier. NCT03098030.
引言:拓扑替康被批准作为小细胞肺癌(SCLC)的二线治疗药物。伊立替康因其给药方案更便捷且耐受性更好,也被频繁使用。临床前研究支持双唾液酸神经节苷脂(GD2)作为SCLC的一个靶点,以及在此背景下抗GD2抗体地努图希单抗联合伊立替康的治疗方案。我们测试了地努图希单抗/伊立替康与伊立替康或拓扑替康作为复发/难治性(RR)SCLC二线治疗方案的疗效。 材料与方法:RR SCLC且东部肿瘤协作组体能状态为0 - 1的患者按2:2:1随机分组,接受地努图希单抗16 - 17.5mg/m静脉注射(IV)/伊立替康350mg/m IV(第1天)、伊立替康350mg/m IV(第1天)或拓扑替康1.5mg/m IV(第1 - 5天),每21天为一个周期。主要终点是总生存期(OS);次要终点是无进展生存期(PFS)、客观缓解率(ORR;完全缓解[CR] + 部分缓解[PR])和临床获益率(CBR;CR + PR + 疾病稳定)。同时评估安全性/耐受性。 结果:共有471例患者被随机分配至地努图希单抗/伊立替康组(n = 187)、伊立替康组(n = 190)或拓扑替康组(n = 94)。各组间年龄、性别、体能状态、既往治疗及转移病灶部位相似。接受地努图希单抗/伊立替康治疗的患者与接受伊立替康或拓扑替康治疗的患者相比,生存期和缓解率并未提高(中位OS分别为6.9个月、7.0个月和7.4个月[p = 0.3132];中位PFS分别为3.5个月、3.0个月和3.4个月[p = 0.3482];确认的ORR分别为17.1%、18.9%和20.2%[p = 0.8043];CBR分别为67.4%、58.9%和68.1%[p = 0.0989])。3/4级不良事件(接受地努图希单抗/伊立替康治疗的患者中≥5%出现)包括中性粒细胞减少、贫血、腹泻和乏力。 结论:与单独使用伊立替康相比,地努图希单抗/伊立替康治疗并未改善RR SCLC患者的OS。每21天给药一次的伊立替康与每21天每日给药5次的拓扑替康显示出相当的活性。 临床试验:美国国立医学图书馆标识符。NCT03098030。
J Thorac Oncol. 2010-10
Nat Cancer. 2025-6-16
Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2024-9-16
Thorac Cancer. 2024-1