Phase III, randomized trial of mirvetuximab soravtansine versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: primary analysis of FORWARD I.
Loading...
Embargo End Date
ICR Authors
Authors
Moore, KN
Oza, AM
Colombo, N
Oaknin, A
Scambia, G
Lorusso, D
Konecny, GE
Banerjee, S
Murphy, CG
Tanyi, JL
Hirte, H
Konner, JA
Lim, PC
Prasad-Hayes, M
Monk, BJ
Pautier, P
Wang, J
Berkenblit, A
Vergote, I
Birrer, MJ
Oza, AM
Colombo, N
Oaknin, A
Scambia, G
Lorusso, D
Konecny, GE
Banerjee, S
Murphy, CG
Tanyi, JL
Hirte, H
Konner, JA
Lim, PC
Prasad-Hayes, M
Monk, BJ
Pautier, P
Wang, J
Berkenblit, A
Vergote, I
Birrer, MJ
Document Type
Journal Article
Date
2021-06-01
Date Accepted
2021-02-25
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) is an antibody-drug conjugate comprising a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-binding antibody, cleavable linker, and the maytansinoid DM4, a potent tubulin-targeting agent. The randomized, open-label, phase III study FORWARD I compared MIRV and investigator's choice chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with 1-3 prior lines of therapy and whose tumors were positive for FRα expression were randomly assigned, in a 2 : 1 ratio, to receive MIRV (6 mg/kg, adjusted ideal body weight) or chemotherapy (paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or topotecan). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival [PFS, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, blinded independent central review] in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in the prespecified FRα high population. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients were randomized; 243 received MIRV and 109 received chemotherapy. The primary endpoint, PFS, did not reach statistical significance in either the ITT [hazard ratio (HR), 0.98, P = 0.897] or the FRα high population (HR, 0.69, P = 0.049). Superior outcomes for MIRV over chemotherapy were observed in all secondary endpoints in the FRα high population including improved objective response rate (24% versus 10%), CA-125 responses (53% versus 25%), and patient-reported outcomes (27% versus 13%). Fewer treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (25.1% versus 44.0%), and fewer events leading to dose reduction (19.8% versus 30.3%) and treatment discontinuation (4.5% versus 8.3%) were seen with MIRV compared with chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with platinum-resistant EOC, MIRV did not result in a significant improvement in PFS compared with chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints consistently favored MIRV, particularly in patients with high FRα expression. MIRV showed a differentiated and more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy.
Citation
Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2021, 32 (6), pp. 757 - 765
Source Title
Publisher
ELSEVIER
ISSN
0923-7534
eISSN
1569-8041