This is an important progress for patients with KRASG12C mutation. Median PFS of 11 months is very encouraging for a previously “undruggable” molecular signature.
Adagrasib (MRTX849) is an oral, highly selective, small-molecule, covalent inhibitor of KRASG12C. We report results from a phase I/IB study of adagrasib in non–small-cell lung cancer, colorectal cancer, and other solid tumors harboring the KRASG12C mutation.
Patients with advanced KRASG12C-mutant solid tumors were treated with adagrasib 150 mg orally once daily, 300 mg once daily, 600 mg once daily, 1,200 mg once daily, or 600 mg orally twice a day using an accelerated titration design, which transitioned to a modified toxicity probability interval design when a predefined degree of toxicity was observed or target adagrasib exposure was achieved. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity were evaluated.
Twenty-five patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of adagrasib. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was 600 mg twice a day on the basis of safety, tolerability, and observed pharmacokinetics properties. No maximum tolerated dose was formally defined. After a median follow-up of 19.6 months, eight of 15 patients (53.3%; 95% CI, 26.6 to 78.7) with RECIST-evaluable KRASG12C-mutant non–small-cell lung cancer treated at 600 mg twice a day achieved a confirmed partial response. The median duration of response was 16.4 months (95% CI, 3.1 to not estimable). The median progression-free survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 2.6 to not estimable). One of two patients with KRASG12C-mutant colorectal cancer treated at 600 mg twice a day achieved a partial response (duration of response, 4.2 months). At the RP2D, the most common treatment-related adverse events (any grade) were nausea (80.0%), diarrhea (70.0%), vomiting (50.0%), and fatigue (45.0%). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was fatigue (15.0%).
Adagrasib 600 mg twice a day was well tolerated and exhibited antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring the KRASG12C mutation.
Superior to osi (23 vs 16 progression-free survival). This is more toxic though, but seems manageable. Could this be a new first line standard of care? Also, this includes brain penetration data.
Adding SBRT improves local control and disease progression in the brain but not overall survival. Do the radiation oncologists have input? Is it worth it to control symptoms?
Neoadjuvant Osimertinib did not have a significant impact on major pathologic response and there were no ypCR’s after a median of ~8 weeks of therapy. I do think this shows a measurable response, enough such that I would consider Osi in a patient with “borderline resectable” disease.
Osimertinib in adjuvant, now after chemotherapy and radiation, next… Neoadjuvant??? Trials are ongoing.
This is here till progression.
Failed? Numerical overall survival (OS) benefit for sacituzumab vs docetaxol, but not statistically significant. Better tolerated, also overall survival (OS) noticed more in patients who did not respond to antiPDL-1 therapy.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
