Pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel for previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (KEYNOTE‐063): A randomized, open‐label, phase 3 trial in Asian patients
Background KEYNOTE‐063 (NCT03019588) investigated pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel as second‐line therapy in Asian patients with advanced programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1)–positive (combined positive score ≥1) gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Methods This randomized, open‐label, phase...
Saved in:
Published in | Cancer Vol. 128; no. 5; pp. 995 - 1003 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01.03.2022
John Wiley and Sons Inc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0008-543X 1097-0142 1097-0142 |
DOI | 10.1002/cncr.34019 |
Cover
Summary: | Background
KEYNOTE‐063 (NCT03019588) investigated pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel as second‐line therapy in Asian patients with advanced programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1)–positive (combined positive score ≥1) gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.
Methods
This randomized, open‐label, phase 3 study was conducted at 36 medical centers in China (mainland), Malaysia, South Korea, and Taiwan. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to 200 mg of pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks for ≤2 years or 80 mg/m2 of paclitaxel intravenously every week. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and safety.
Results
Between February 16, 2017, and March 12, 2018, 94 patients were randomly assigned (47 pembrolizumab/47 paclitaxel) after screening; enrollment was stopped on March 12, 2018, based on the results of the global KEYNOTE‐061 study, and patients were followed until the last patient's last visit. Median OS was 8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4‐10 months) with pembrolizumab versus 8 months (95% CI, 5‐11 months) with paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.63‐1.54). Median PFS was 2 months (95% CI, 1‐3 months) with pembrolizumab versus 4 months (95% CI, 3‐6 months) with paclitaxel (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.04‐2.52). ORR was 13% for pembrolizumab versus 19% for paclitaxel. Any‐grade treatment‐related adverse events occurred in 28 pembrolizumab‐treated patients (60%) and 42 paclitaxel‐treated patients (96%); grades 3 to 5 events occurred in 5 patients (11%) and 28 patients (64%), respectively.
Conclusions
Definitive conclusions about the efficacy of second‐line pembrolizumab in Asian patients with advanced PD‐L1–positive gastric/GEJ cancer are limited because of insufficient power, but pembrolizumab was well tolerated in this patient population. Efficacy followed a trend similar to that observed in the phase 3 KEYNOTE‐061 trial.
In this small sample of Asian patients with advanced PD‐L1–positive (combined positive score [CPS] ≥1) gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer enrolled in the randomized, open‐label, phase 3 KEYNOTE‐063 study, definitive conclusions on clinical outcomes are limited; however, second‐line pembrolizumab monotherapy seems to be well tolerated in this patient population. These findings are consistent with those of the larger global KEYNOTE‐061 study in patients with CPS ≥1 gastric/GEJ cancer. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | We thank the patients and their families and caregivers as well as all primary investigators and site personnel for participating in the study. Medical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Kathleen Richards, PhD, and Holly C. Cappelli, PhD, CMPP, of ApotheCom (Yardley, Pennsylvania). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, New Jersey. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03019588). ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
ISSN: | 0008-543X 1097-0142 1097-0142 |
DOI: | 10.1002/cncr.34019 |