PRESERVE 2: A phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial of trilaciclib versus placebo in patients receiving first- or second-line gemcitabine and carboplatin for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

Shom Goel1; Joyce O’Shaughnessy2; Antoinette R. Tan3; Boris Krastev4; Hope Rugo5; Philippe Aftimos6; Denise A. Yardley7; Zoran Andric8; Curt Wolfgang9; Jessica A. Sorrentino9; Wenli Tao9; Andrew Beelen9; Rajesh Malik9; and Sarika Jain9

This presentation is the intellectual property of the author/presenter. Copies of this poster obtained through QR (Quick Response) and/or text key codes are for personal use only and may not be reproduced without written permission of the authors. Contact them at shom.goel@petermac.org or sjain@g1therapeutics.com for permission to reprint and/or distribute.

Introduction
Introduction
Objectives
Objectives
Patients
Patients
Objectives
Study design
Objectives
Study Sites
References
References and
Acknowledgments

1 Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; 2 Baylor University Medical Center, Texas Oncology, US Oncology, Dallas, TX, USA; 3 Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA; 4 MHAT Hospital for Women Health Nadezhda, Sofia, Bulgaria; 5 University of California San Francisco Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA, USA; 6 Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium; 7 Sarah Cannon Research Institute and Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, TN, USA; 8 Clinical Hospital Centre Bezanijska Kosa, Belgrade, Serbia; 9 G1 Therapeutics, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA

American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting | June 4–8, 2021 | Chicago, IL, USA

 

Introduction

  • Chemotherapy, alone or in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors, is the standard of care for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC)1–3
    • However, not all patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)–positive TNBC are appropriate candidates for immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment, and some patients with PD-L1–negative TNBC may not derive clinical benefit4
    • Additionally, chemotherapy-induced immunosuppression may affect antitumor efficacy, owing to an inability of the host immune system to effectively mount a response against the cancer5
Diagram 1
  • Trilaciclib is an intravenous (IV) cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitor indicated to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression in adult patients when administered prior to a platinum/etoposide- or topotecan-containing chemotherapy regimen for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer6
  • A randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial (NCT02978716) compared trilaciclib prior to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCb) with GCb alone in patients with TNBC13
    • Although the primary endpoint of myeloprotection was not met, a clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival (OS) was observed in the intention-to-treat population with both PD-L1–positive and –negative tumors13,14
      • Among all patients, median OS was 20.1 months with trilaciclib plus GCb versus 12.6 months with GCb alone (hazard ratio 0.36) in the primary analysis13
Next Section
Back to home
 

Objectives

PRESERVE 2 STUDY

  • PRESERVE 2 (NCT04799249) is a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-cohort study evaluating the safety and efficacy of trilaciclib versus placebo administered prior to GCb for patients receiving first- or second-line treatment for advanced/metastatic TNBC
  • This study is designed to confirm the OS benefit seen in the phase 2 study, and to evaluate efficacy in a post–checkpoint inhibitor population

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Diagram 2
Next Section
Back to home
 

Patient Eligibility Criteria

Diagram 3
Next Section
Back to home
 

Study Design

Figure 1

ENDPOINTS

Diagram 4

OPTIONAL BIOPSY COLLECTION

  • To evaluate the impact of trilaciclib on changes to the tumor-associated immune response in TNBC, immunophenotypic changes will be compared between tumor biopsies from patients receiving trilaciclib or placebo prior to GCb
  • For patients who consent to optional biopsy collection, fresh tumor biopsies from a recurrent/metastatic lesion will be collected at baseline and on-treatment, prior to cycle 2
    • Archival tissue is acceptable for use as the baseline sample if no systemic therapy or local radiation has been administered between biopsy and randomization
  • Target participation for optional biopsy collection is 80 patients, including ~60 patients from cohort 1 and ~20 patients from cohort 2

STATISTICS

  • Data from each cohort will be analyzed separately
  • An interim analysis for OS will be performed for cohort 1 when ~70% of required events have been observed
  • If the primary analysis of OS is statistically significant, then TTCD-fatigue will be analyzed
Next Section
Back to home
 

Study Sites

Diagram 5
Next Section
Back to home
 

References and Acknowledgments

REFERENCES

  • 1. Twelves C, et al. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2016;100:74–87.
  • 2. Cortes J, et al. Lancet. 2020;396:1817–28.
  • 3. Schmid P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:2108–21.
  • 4. Emens LA, et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5:74–82.
  • 5. Zitvogel L, et al. Nat Rev Immunol. 2008;8:59–73.
  • 6. COSELA™ (trilaciclib). Prescribing Information. https://www.g1therapeutics.com/cosela/pi/. Accessed April 2021
  • 7. Daniel D, et al. Int J Cancer. 2021;148:2557–70.
  • 8. Weiss JM, et al. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1613–21.
  • 9. Hart LL, et al. Adv Ther. 2021;38:350–65.
  • 10. He S, et al. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9:eaal3986.
  • 11. Li C, et al. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2021;87:689–700.
  • 12. Lai A, et al. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8:e000847.
  • 13. Tan AR, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:1587–601.
  • 14. O’Shaughnessy J, et al. SABCS poster presentation. 2020; abstract #PD1-06.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Study sponsored by G1 Therapeutics. Medical writing assistance was provided by Farhana Burnett, PhD, from Alligent Europe (Envision Pharma Group), funded by G1 Therapeutics.

Back to home