Glembatumumab vedotin for patients with metastatic, gpNMB overexpressing, triple-negative breast cancer (“METRIC”): a randomized multicenter study

Abstract The METRIC study (NCT#0199733) explored a novel antibody–drug conjugate, glembatumumab vedotin (GV), targeting gpNMB that is overexpressed in ~40% of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and associated with poor prognosis. The study was a randomized, open-label, phase 2b study...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Linda T. Vahdat, Peter Schmid, Andres Forero-Torres, Kimberly Blackwell, Melinda L. Telli, Michelle Melisko, Volker Möbus, Javier Cortes, Alberto J. Montero, Cynthia Ma, Rita Nanda, Gail S. Wright, Yi He, Thomas Hawthorne, Rebecca G. Bagley, Abdel-Baset Halim, Christopher D. Turner, Denise A. Yardley
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/17180d15d53a444b97cb83ce78fb7480
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Abstract The METRIC study (NCT#0199733) explored a novel antibody–drug conjugate, glembatumumab vedotin (GV), targeting gpNMB that is overexpressed in ~40% of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and associated with poor prognosis. The study was a randomized, open-label, phase 2b study that evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) of GV compared with capecitabine in gpNMB-overexpressing TNBC. Patients who had previously received anthracycline and taxane-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to receive, GV (1.88 mg/kg IV q21 days) or capecitabine (2500 mg/m2 PO daily d1–14 q21 days). The primary endpoint was RECIST 1.1 PFS per independent, blinded central review. In all, 327 patients were randomized to GV (213 treated) or capecitabine (92 treated). Median PFS was 2.9 months for GV vs. 2.8 months for capecitabine. The most common grade ≥3 toxicities for GV were neutropenia, rash, and leukopenia, and for capecitabine were fatigue, diarrhea, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved PFS over capecitabine or demonstrate a relative risk/benefit improvement over capecitabine.