Video

Rapid Readouts: Phase 3 ASCENT Study for Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Hope S. Rugo, MD, FASCO, discusses data presented at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting from the phase 3 ASCENT study of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer treated with sacituzumab govitecan.

Hope S. Rugo, MD, FASCO, discusses data from the following presentation:

  • Assessment of Sacituzumab Govitecan vs Treatment of Physician’s Choice Cohort by Agent in the Phase 3 ASCENT Study of Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. (O’Shaughnessy, ASCO 2021, Abstract 1077)
    • The objective of this study is to report results in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) treated with sacituzumab govitecan or treatment of physician’s choice (TPC).
    • Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate comprised of an anti–Trop-2 antibody coupled to a cytotoxic SN-38 through a hydrolyzable linker.
    • 529 patients with mTNBC who had received ≥ 2 prior chemotherapies were randomly assigned 1:1 to either SG 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 & 8, every 21-day cycle (n=267), or treatment of physician’s choice (capecitabine, eribulin, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine) (n=262).
    • Efficacy outcomes were assessed in the brain metastases-negative population for each agent:
      • Progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1.
      • Secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR) assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1, duration of response, overall survival (OS), and safety.
    • Conclusions: efficacy
      • SG resulted in longer median PFS vs each TPC agent (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, gemcitabine): 5.6 vs 2.1, 1.6, 1.6, and 2.7 months, respectively.
      • SG treatment also resulted in longer median OS vs eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine (12.1 vs 6.9, 5.9, 5.2, and 8.4 months, respectively).
      • The ORR (35% vs 5%, 4%, 6%, and 3%) and clinical benefit rate (45% vs 8%, 6%, 10%, and 14%) were higher with SG vs eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine.
      • Median duration of response for SG was 6.3 months compared to eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine (3.6, 2.8, not evaluable, and 2.9 months, respectively).
    • Conclusions: safety
      • Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) with SG vs eribulin vs the other 3 TPC agents combined included neutropenia (51% vs 31% vs 36%), leukopenia (10% vs 5% vs 6%), diarrhea (10% vs 0% vs 1%), anemia (8% vs 2% vs 8%), febrile neutropenia (6% vs 2% vs 2%), and fatigue (2% vs 5% vs 6%).
      • SG has a manageable safety profile and low rates of discontinuation due to AEs, and no treatment-related deaths were reported.
  • An efficacy benefit was seen with SG vs TPC and retained when evaluating each TPC chemotherapy agent individually.
  • These results support consideration of SG as a new standard of care in patients with pretreated mTNBC.
Related Videos
Andrew Davis, MD
Adrienne G. Waks, MD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Video 8 - 2 KOLs are featured in, "Emerging Trials in the Management of HR+/HER2- mBC"
Video 7 - 2 KOLs are featured in, "Adverse Event Data and Management for Optimal Quality of Life in HR+/HER2- mBC"
A panel of 5 experts on breast cancer
A panel of 5 experts on breast cancer
Cynthia Ma, MD, PhD
Combination of Zanubrutinib + Venetoclax for Treatment-naive CLL/SLL With del(17p) and/or TP53: Preliminary Results From SEQUOIA Arm D
Arya Mariam Roy, MBBS
Joyce A. O’Shaughnessy, MD, and Neil M. Iyengar, MD