• Non ci sono risultati.

La terapia di seconda linea: TKI o immunoterapia?

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Condividi "La terapia di seconda linea: TKI o immunoterapia?"

Copied!
46
0
0

Testo completo

(1)

LA TERAPIA DI II LINEA:

TKI o IMMUNOTERAPIA ?

Michele De Tursi

Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche, orali e biotecnologiche Cattedra di Oncologia Medica

Università G. D’Annunzio Chieti

(2)

7

10

2

5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Kidney Breast Prostate Lung

22,9 27,9

38,9

4.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Lung Prostate

Breast Kidney

A disproportionate number of approved targeted therapies for mRCC vs. number of patients

Incidence per 100,000 population 5

Number of approved targeted therapies for metastaticdisease

Cancer type

Kidney1 Breast2 Prostate3 Lung4

1. Escudier B, et al. Ann Oncol 2012;23(Suppl 7):vii65-vii71.

2. Cardoso F, et al. Ann Oncol 2012;23(Suppl 7):vii11-vii19.

3. Heidenreich A, et al. EAU Prostate Cancer Guidelines, 2014.

4. Peters S, et al. Ann Oncol 2012;23(Suppl 7):vii56-vii64.

5. GLOBOCAN 2008. Available at: http://globocan.iarc.fr/

Number of targeted therapies Incidence

5

Elaborazione grafica di dati da testo

I nuovi farmaci Target

II linea RCC

(3)

Choice of 2nd line therapies: PFS

Rini et al. Lancet 2011. Hutson et al. JCO 2014. Motzer et al. Cancer 2010. Motzer et al. (2015). NEJM, 150925150201006–11. Choueiri et al. (2016). The Lancet Oncology, 17(7), 917–927. Motzer et al. (2015) Lancet Oncology, 16(15), 1473–1482.

AXITINIB: 4,8 EVEROLIMUS: 4,9

LENVATINIB: 4,8 TEMSIROLIMUS: 4,3

NIVOLUMAB: 4,6

CABOZANTINIB: 7,4

(4)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

Nivo ?

Cabo ? Axi ?

(5)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(6)

AXITINIB

(7)

AXITINIB

(8)

Stato dell’arte AXITINIB

(9)

AXITINIB

(10)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(11)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(12)
(13)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(14)

CheckMate 025:

A randomized, open-label, phase III study of nivolumab versus everolimus in

advanced renal cell carcinoma

Padmanee Sharma, Bernard Escudier, David F. McDermott, Saby George, Hans J. Hammers, Sandhya Srinivas, Scott S. Tykodi, Jeffrey A. Sosman, Giuseppe Procopio, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Daniel Castellano, Howard Gurney, Frede Donskov, Petri Bono, John Wagstaff, Thomas C. Gauler, Takeshi Ueda,

Li-An Xu, Ian M. Waxman, Robert J. Motzer, on behalf of the CheckMate 025 investigators

(15)

Disease assessments

Every 8 weeks from randomization through 12 months

Then every 12 weeks until progression or treatment discontinuation Primary endpoint

Overall survival (OS) Enrolled patients

Previously

treated advanced or metastatic clear-cell RCC

1 or 2 prior anti- angiogenic

treatments Randomize 1:1

Nivolumab (N = 410)

3 mg/kg every 2 weeks intravenous

Everolimus (N = 411) 10 mg/day

oral

Treat until progression or intolerable toxicity

Treatment beyond

progression was permitted if drug was tolerated and clinical benefit was noted

Randomized, open-labeled phase III study to compare nivolumab with everolimus in patients with advanced RCC after prior

systemic therapy (NCT01668784)

NIVOLUMAB

(16)

NIVOLUMAB

(17)

CheckMate 025:

A randomized, open-label, phase III study of nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma

NIVOLUMAB

(18)

CheckMate 025:

A randomized, open-label, phase III study of nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma

NIVOLUMAB

25

5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Nivolumab Everolimus

Objective Response Rate (%)

P < 0.0001

Patients on nivolumab treatment had a significantly better objective response rate than those on everolimus treatment

This means that more patients responded to treatment with nivolumab than to treatment with everolimus

(19)

NIVOLUMAB

(20)

NIVOLUMAB

(21)

CABOZANTINIB

(22)

CABOZANTINIB

(23)

CABOZANTINIB

(24)

CABOZANTINIB

(25)
(26)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(27)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(28)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(29)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

Pazienti

particolari ?

(30)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(31)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(32)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

Lunga

durata di I linea ?

(33)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(34)

Rivalutazione marzo 2018:

Riduzione di malattia > 60% !!!

Paziente 42 aa

(settembre 2014 RCC con metastasi sincrone polmonari)

Sunitinib

Dicembre 2017

Nivolumab

CASO CLINICO

> 3 anni di I linea

(35)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

Paziente fragile?

(36)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(37)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

Quando lasciare Nivo ?

(38)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(39)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(40)

Treatment Landscape for Metastatic RCC

(41)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(42)
(43)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(44)

Strategie terapeutiche a confronto in II linea

(45)
(46)

Seconda linea e oltre…

???

Riferimenti

Documenti correlati

Randomized phase II trial of sunitinib on an intermittent versus continuous dosing schedule as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Atkinson B, Kalra S, Wang

Durvalumab with or without tremelimumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: EAGLE, a randomized, open-label phase III studyR.

Presented By Robert Uzzo at 2019 ASCO Annual Meeting... CARMENA: Prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3

• BMS CA209915: A phase III, randomized, double- blind study of adjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab versus ipilimumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab after complete

Motivated by the encouraging overall survival results of a dose-ranging phase  II nivolumab trial, CheckMate 025 was designed as a phase  III, open-label study comparing nivolumab

ESPAC-4: a multicenter, international, open-label randomized controlled phase III trial of adjuvant combination chemotherapy of gemcitabine (GEM) and capecitabine (CAP)

Phase III Open-Label Randomized Study of Eribulin Mesylate Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an

LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944) is a randomized, global, multicenter, open-label, Phase III trial, evaluating selpercatinib versus carboplatin or cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy