Advertisement


Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, on AML: New Data on IDH2-Mutant Alleles, Enasidenib, and Conventional Care

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, of Institut Gustave Roussy, discuss phase III findings from the IDHENTIFY trial, which showed that mutational burden and co-mutational profiles differed between patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia that exhibited IDH2-R140 and IDH2-R172 mutations. Enasidenib improved survival outcomes for patients with IDH2-R172 mutations: median overall survival and 1-year survival rates were approximately double those in the conventional care arm (Abstract 7005).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Courtney DiNardo: Well, it is such a pleasure to be joined by you today, my friend and colleague, Dr. Stéphane de Botton. I was hoping you could kind of recap a little bit some of the data that you presented at the ASCO meeting. Stéphane de Botton: Well, thank you first, for the invite. These are the results of the subgroup analyzes of the IDHENTIFYtrial. The first trials that compare enocidnib in elderly population relapse, refractory AML with an IDH2 mutation to convention care regimes or NZDB. So overall these results are very encouraging because response rates were significantly better in NZDB, even for survival was significantly better. Time to treatment failure was significantly better. So we failed to demonstrate any superiority in terms of overall survival. But this is probably related to the high dropout in this study, where we saw, for instance, 20 patients who do not receive the allocated treatment before starting any treatment. So this may hamper what we've done, but globally it's positive.The key question here is about the significance of the two variants. The 142, which represents three quarters of the patients and the 172K. The biology is different, as you know, because the 172K is associated with less mutations and very specific co mutational burden. Great. Therefore, we try to analyze these data as based on the trial, because it'll be probably different at frontline. And first we found that overall, for both mutations, the response rate was significant. I know you're not surprised because you've seen these results. Courtney DiNardo: If I remember they were about the same as what was seen in the original phase one study. Stéphane de Botton: Almost yes. Courtney DiNardo: So about. 20% CR, 30% CR CRH, 40% overall response rates, more or less Stéphane de Botton: Exactly. So, overall the response rates was better. Whatever, the type of variants you have. First, the commutation in burden was different between de novo or newly diagnosed AML and relapse refractory. This is anticipated. And not that with the 172K, 20% add a TB3 mutation, which is high. Courtney DiNardo: Yeah. That is higher than I would've expected otherwise. Stéphane de Botton: Yep. And the higher incidents in both for ranks one, which is less, usually in newly diagnosed. So the pattern of mutations were also different. So the competition burden was higher in the 142 as expected. The median was five as opposed to four in the 172K and different mutation. So in that case, we thought that the results could be different and indeed they are different. With the 142 we are not very confident because the drop out was huge in the study. But with the 172K only one patient did not receive the allocated treatment in their conventional care. I would like to say that we are very confident about the robustness for the 172K of these results. Courtney DiNardo: And just recap again, real quick, the differential. So it was the R 172K patients that seemed to do particularly well with enasidanib? Or how would you describe that? Stéphane de Botton: Ah, so the response rate was really very impressive yeah. In that elderly, very pretreated population. So they achieved an overall response rate above 50%, with more than 30% of CR rates. So it's fairly high, but truly what was really impressive is the overall survival, almost 15 months, median overall survival for the 172K treated with ENA as opposed to those were once receive ENA in which the overall survival was almost eight months. So you double the overall survival. For event free survival was really, also very impressed. More than 10 months, as opposed to less than three. Courtney DiNardo: It really is. So the R 172K IDH2 mutated patients. So that's about a quarter to a third of the IDH2, mutated patients in general, in the relapse setting, single agent, seeing a median survival over a year, about 15 months, it's dramatic. Stéphane de Botton: It's fairly high and it represents a good demonstration that it's a very good target. This is not the monogenic disease, but if the commutation of burden, we previously published together that you increase the response rate and was exactly the same. But here you increase the overall survival in that subpopulation. So again, the tolerance was very good. There's nothing more to say. It's really very impressive. Courtney DiNardo: It's a well tolerated therapy targeted for patients with IDH2. Stéphane de Botton: In the relapse refractory setting. That's that's really something very, very impressive. Courtney DiNardo: Perfect. Well, thank you so much for joining us. This has been a pleasure.

Related Videos

Lung Cancer
Immunotherapy

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, and Oladimeji Akinboro, MD, MPH, on NSCLC: Outcomes of Anti–PD-(L)1 Therapy With or Without Chemotherapy in the First-Line Setting

Gilberto de Lima Lopes, Jr, MD, MBA, of Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami, and Oladimeji Akinboro, MD, MPH, of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), discuss a data analysis, which suggests that most subgroups of patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer with a PD-L1 score of 50% or greater who are receiving FDA-approved chemotherapy/immunotherapy regimens may have overall survival outcomes comparable to or better than immunotherapy-alone regimens (Abstract 9000).

Gynecologic Cancers

Bradley J. Monk, MD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Data on Rucaparib Monotherapy vs Placebo as Maintenance Treatment

Bradley J. Monk, MD, of the University of Arizona College of Medicine and Creighton University School of Medicine, discusses phase III findings from the ATHENA–MONO (GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45) trial. It showed that rucaparib as first-line maintenance treatment, following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, improved progression-free survival in patients with ovarian cancer, irrespective of homologous recombination deficiency status (Abstract LBA5500).

Breast Cancer

Tara B. Sanft, MD, on How Diet and Exercise May Affect Completion of Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

Tara B. Sanft, MD, of Yale University, discusses the results of the LEANer study (Lifestyle, Exercise, and Nutrition Early After Diagnosis) in women with breast cancer. It showed that patients with newly diagnosed disease who were just starting chemotherapy could improve physical activity and diet quality. While both groups had high rates of treatment completion, women in the intervention who exercised at or above the recommended levels did better in terms of treatment completion, with fewer dose reductions and delays (Abstract 12007).

 

Skin Cancer
Immunotherapy

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, on Melanoma: Distant Metastasis–Free Survival With Adjuvant Pembrolizumab

Georgina V. Long, MD, PhD, of the Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, discusses phase III findings from the KEYNOTE-716 study. The trial showed that compared with placebo, adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved distant metastasis–free survival in patients with resected stage IIB and IIC melanoma. The findings also suggest a continued reduction in the risk of recurrence and a favorable benefit-risk profile (Abstract LBA9500).

Neuroendocrine Tumors

Mairéad G. McNamara, PhD, MBBCh, on Neuroendocrine Carcinoma: Findings on Liposomal Irinotecan Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid or Docetaxel

Mairéad G. McNamara, PhD, MBBCh, of The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, discusses phase II findings of the NET-02 trial, which explored an unmet need in the second-line treatment of patients with progressive, poorly differentiated extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma. In the trial, the combination of liposomal irinotecan, fluorouracil, and folinic acid, but not docetaxel, met the primary endpoint of 6-month progression-free survival rate (Abstract 4005).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement