Tecentriq plus chemo helped metastatic non-squamous NSCLC live longer vs. chemo alone

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

Genentech said the phase III IMpower130 study met its co-primary endpoints of overall survival and progression-free survival.

Genentech is a member of the Roche Group.

The combination of Tecentriq (atezolizumab) plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and Abraxane [albumin-bound paclitaxel; nab-paclitaxel]) helped people live significantly longer compared to chemotherapy alone in the initial treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

In addition, the Tecentriq combination reduced the risk of disease worsening or death compared with chemotherapy alone. Safety for the Tecentriq and chemotherapy combination appeared consistent with the known safety profile of the individual medicines, and no new safety signals were identified with the combination. These data will be presented at an upcoming oncology congress.

Currently, Genentech has eight phase III lung cancer studies underway evaluating Tecentriq alone or in combination with other medicines. This is the third positive Phase III study evaluating TECENTRIQ alone or in combination to demonstrate an OS benefit for people with Tecentriq.

IMpower130 is a phase III, multicenter, open-label, randomized study evaluating the efficacy and safety of Tecentriq in combination with carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel versus chemotherapy (carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel) alone for chemotherapy-naïve patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. The study enrolled 724 people who were randomized equally (1:1) to receive:

  • TECENTRIQ plus carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel (Arm A), or

  • Carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel (Arm B, control arm)

During the treatment-induction phase, people in Arm A received Tecentriq and carboplatin on day 1 of each 21-day cycle, and nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 21-day cycle for 4 or 6 cycles or until loss of clinical benefit, whichever occurs first.

People received Tecentriq during the maintenance treatment phase until loss of clinical benefit was observed.

During the treatment-induction phase, people in Arm B received carboplatin on day 1 and nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 21-day cycle for 4 or 6 cycles or until disease progression, whichever occurs first.

People received best supportive care during the maintenance treatment phase. Switch maintenance to pemetrexed was also permitted. People who were consented prior to a protocol revision were given the option to crossover to receive Tecentriq as monotherapy until disease progression.

The co-primary endpoints were:

  • PFS as determined by the investigator using RECIST v1.1 in all randomized people without an EGFR or ALK mutation (intention-to-treat wild-type)

  • OS in the ITT-WT population

  • IMpower130 met its OS and PFS co-primary endpoints.

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

For nearly 25 years, business executive Lou Weisbach and urologist Richard J. Boxer have argued that finding the money to finance the cures for devastating diseases is not as difficult as it appears. To start finding the cures, the U.S. Department of the Treasury needs to issue some bonds—$750 billion worth. Next, you hire CEOs—one...

There is general agreement that the United States spends too much on health care, especially on pharmaceuticals.  But what we spend on drugs is not simply a function of price. If eggs double in price, people can simply cut the number of eggs they eat in half.  Simply stated, cost is the product of (price per unit times the number of units purchased). 
What did President Richard M. Nixon and Senator Edward M. Kennedy have in common? They each played a pivotal role in the passage of the National Cancer Act signed by Nixon on Dec. 23, 1971. The NCA established the National Cancer Program authorizing the initial investment in the NCI-designated Cancer Centers Program. 
When I first proposed targeting PCNA (proliferating cell nuclear antigen) as a therapeutic approach, the response I got was: “No one will ever make a drug against PCNA. It’s undruggable.” The protein lacks enzymatic activity, has a disordered region, and binds to over 200 other proteins within the cell. From a traditional drug development perspective, these characteristics made PCNA an impossible target.

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login