Dataset Information

Final Overall Survival Efficacy Results of Ivosidenib for Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma With IDH1 Mutation: The Phase 3 Randomized Clinical ClarIDHy Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo.

Objective

To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1-vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.

Design, setting, and participants

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life.

Results

Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 33-83 years]) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women [65%]; median age, 61 years [range, 33-80 years]) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women [61%]; median age, 63 years [range, 40-83 years]); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.56-1.12]; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.70]; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients [9%] receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients [7%] receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo.

Conclusions and relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857.

SUBMITTER: Zhu AX

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8461552 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIsocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1) is mutated in up to 25% of cholangiocarcinomas, especially intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Ivosidenib is an oral, targeted inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1) approved in the USA for the treatment of mIDH1 acute myeloid leukaemia in newly diagnosed patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy and patients with relapsed or refractory disease. Ivosidenib is under clinical evaluation in a phase 1 study that aims to assess its safety and tolerability in patients with mIDH1 solid tumours. Here we report data for the mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma cohort.MethodsWe did a phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib monotherapy in mIDH1 solid tumours at 12 clinical sites in the USA and one in France. The primary outcomes were safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, and recommended phase 2 dose. Eligible patients had a documented mIDH1 tumour based on local testing, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, one or more previous lines of therapy, and evaluable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. During dose escalation, ivosidenib was administered orally at 200-1200 mg daily in 28-day cycles in a standard 3?+?3 design; during expansion, patients received the selected dose on the basis of pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety, and activity data from dose escalation. Safety and clinical activity analyses were reported for all patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma who were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. Enrolment is complete, and the study is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02073994.FindingsBetween March 14, 2014 and May 12, 2017, 73 patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma were enrolled and received ivosidenib. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported and maximum tolerated dose was not reached; 500 mg daily was selected for expansion. Common (?20%) adverse events, regardless of cause, were fatigue (31 [42%]; two [3%] grade ?3), nausea (25 [34%]; one [1%] grade ?3), diarrhoea (23 [32%]), abdominal pain (20 [27%]; two [3%] grade ?3), decreased appetite (20 [27%]; one [1%] grade ?3), and vomiting (17 [23%]). Common grade 3 or worse adverse events were ascites (four [5%]) and anaemia (three [4%]); the only treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse event in more than one patient was fatigue (two [3%]). Two (3%) patients had serious adverse events leading to on-treatment death (Clostridioides difficile infection and procedural haemorrhage); neither was assessed by the investigator as related to treatment. 46 (63%) patients had adverse events deemed related to ivosidenib, of which four (5%) were grade 3 or higher (two [3%] for fatigue; one [1%] each for decreased blood phosphorus and increased blood alkaline phosphatase). One serious adverse event was considered possibly related to treatment (grade 2 supraventricular extrasystoles). Four (5%; 95% CI 1·5-13·4) patients had a partial response. Median progression-free survival was 3·8 months (95% CI 3·6-7·3), 6-month progression-free survival was 40·1% (28·4-51·6), and 12-month progression-free survival was 21·8% (12·3-33·0). Median overall survival was 13·8 months (95% CI 11·1-29·3); however, data were censored for 48 patients (66%).InterpretationIvosidenib might offer a well tolerated option for patients with mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma. An ongoing, global phase 3 study is evaluating ivosidenib versus placebo in patients with previously treated nonresectable or metastatic mIDH1-cholangiocarcinoma.FundingAgios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Project description:BackgroundThe BRIM-3 trial showed improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for vemurafenib compared with dacarbazine in treatment-naive patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. We present final OS data from BRIM-3.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks). OS and PFS were co-primary end points. OS was assessed in the intention-to-treat population, with and without censoring of data for dacarbazine patients who crossed over to vemurafenib.ResultsBetween 4 January 2010 and 16 December 2010, a total of 675 patients were randomized to vemurafenib (n = 337) or dacarbazine (n = 338, of whom 84 crossed over to vemurafenib). At the time of database lock (14 August 2015), median OS, censored at crossover, was significantly longer for vemurafenib than for dacarbazine {13.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.0-15.4] versus 9.7 months [95% CI 7.9-12.8; hazard ratio (HR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.67-0.98]; P = 0.03}, as was median OS without censoring at crossover [13.6 months (95% CI 12.0-15.4) versus 10.3 months (95% CI 9.1-12.8); HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68-0.96); P = 0.01]. Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS rates for vemurafenib versus dacarbazine were 56% versus 46%, 30% versus 24%, 21% versus 19% and 17% versus 16% at 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively. Overall, 173 of the 338 patients (51%) in the dacarbazine arm and 175 of the 337 (52%) of those in the vemurafenib arm received subsequent anticancer therapies, most commonly ipilimumab. Safety data were consistent with the primary analysis.ConclusionsVemurafenib continues to be associated with improved median OS in the BRIM-3 trial after extended follow-up. OS curves converged after ≈3 years, likely as a result of crossover from dacarbazine to vemurafenib and receipt of subsequent anticancer therapies.Clinicaltrials.govNCT01006980.

Project description:BackgroundIsocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations occur in approximately 13% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a relatively uncommon cancer with a poor clinical outcome. The aim of this international phase 3 study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a small-molecule targeted inhibitor of mutated IDH1-in patients with previously treated IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma.MethodsThis multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study included patients from 49 hospitals in six countries aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma who had progressed on previous therapy, and had up to two previous treatment regimens for advanced disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and a measurable lesion as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with a block size of 6 and stratified by number of previous systemic treatment regimens for advanced disease to oral ivosidenib 500 mg or matched placebo once daily in continuous 28-day cycles, by means of an interactive web-based response system. Placebo to ivosidenib crossover was permitted on radiological progression per investigator assessment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent central review. The intention-to-treat population was used for the primary efficacy analyses. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of ivosidenib or placebo. Enrolment is complete; this study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02989857.FindingsBetween Feb 20, 2017, and Jan 31, 2019, 230 patients were assessed for eligibility, and as of the Jan 31, 2019 data cutoff date, 185 patients were randomly assigned to ivosidenib (n=124) or placebo (n=61). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 6·9 months (IQR 2·8-10·9). Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo (median 2·7 months [95% CI 1·6-4·2] vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6]; hazard ratio 0·37; 95% CI 0·25-0·54; one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was ascites (four [7%] of 59 patients receiving placebo and nine [7%] of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib). Serious adverse events were reported in 36 (30%) of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib and 13 (22%) of 59 patients receiving placebo. There were no treatment-related deaths.InterpretationProgression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo, and ivosidenib was well tolerated. This study shows the clinical benefit of targeting IDH1 mutations in advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma.FundingAgios Pharmaceuticals.

Project description:Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Final overall survival (OS) in SOPHIA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02492711), a study of margetuximab versus trastuzumab, both with chemotherapy, in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer, is reported with updated safety. Overall, 536 patients in the intention-to-treat population were randomly assigned to margetuximab (15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 266) plus chemotherapy or trastuzumab (6 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks after a loading dose of 8 mg/kg; n = 270) plus chemotherapy. Primary end points were progression-free survival, previously reported, and OS. Final OS analysis was triggered by 385 prespecified events. The median OS was 21.6 months (95% CI, 18.89 to 25.07) with margetuximab versus 21.9 months (95% CI, 18.69 to 24.18) with trastuzumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.17; P = .620). Preplanned, exploratory analysis of CD16A genotyping suggested a possible improvement in OS for margetuximab in CD16A-158FF patients versus trastuzumab (median OS, 23.6 v 19.2 months; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.00) and a possible improvement in OS for trastuzumab in CD16A-158VV patients versus margetuximab (median OS, 31.1 v 22.0 months; HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.01 to 3.12). Margetuximab safety was comparable with trastuzumab. Final overall OS analysis did not demonstrate margetuximab advantage over trastuzumab. Margetuximab studies in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer with different CD16A allelic variants are warranted.