CONFERENCE UPDATE: ASCO 2023

Erdafitinib demonstrates OS benefits in mUC patients with prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy: The phase 3 THOR trial

STUDY DESIGN

In metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), checkpoint inhibitors are used in the first- and second-line settings.1 However, only 30% of mUC patients respond to these agents.1 After progression on programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, about 30% of patients received subsequent anticancer treatment in real-world practice due to limited treatment options.1 To address this gap, the THOR trial, a confirmatory, randomized, phase 3 study, was conducted to assess whether erdafitinib, a selective pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), could provide survival benefits over chemotherapy in a patient population with FGFR alterations (FGFRalt) mUC patients after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment.1  

In the THOR trial, 266 adult patients with FGFR-alternated mUC which progressed on or after treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were randomized 1:1 to receive erdafitinib 8mg once daily with pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9mg (n=136) or chemotherapy of docetaxel or vinflunine once every 3 weeks (n=130).1 The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).1 The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.1 Patients were followed for a median of 15.9 months.1

The findings showed that patients receiving erdafitinib had an improved OS (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months) and a reduced risk of death compared with chemotherapy (HR=0.64; 95% CI: 0.47-0.88; p=0.005).1 The subgroup analysis demonstrated a consistent OS benefit across different subgroups.1 Due to the obvious survival benefit of erdafitinib, the study was stopped as per the independent data monitoring committee’s (IDMC) recommendation with the unblinding of data and switching patients from chemotherapy to erdafitinib.1 Moreover, patients receiving erdafitinib had an improved PFS and ORR, as well as a consistent safety profile with manageable adverse events (AEs) of erdafitinib.1

FINDINGS

 Primary endpoint: 
  • The primary endpoint was OS1
  • The median OS was significantly higher among patients receiving erdafitinib (12.1 months) than patients receiving chemotherapy (7.8 months)1
  • The risk of death was reduced by 36% in the erdafitinib group compared with the chemotherapy group (HR=0.64; 95% CI: 0.47-0.88; p=0.005)1
  • The OS benefits were consistent across all subgroups by FGFRalt type, lines of prior therapy, visceral metastasis, primary tumor location, and chemotherapy type1
 Secondary endpoints: 
  • The secondary endpoints were PFS and ORR1
  • Erdafitinib was associated with a higher PFS than chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months)1
  • The risk of progression or death was 42% lower in patients receiving erdafitinib compared with those receiving placebo (HR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.44-0.78; p=0.0002)1
  • ORR was 45.6% in the erdafitinib group compared with 11.5% in the chemotherapy group (RR=3.94; 95% CI: 2.37-6.57; p<0.001)1
 Safety: 
  • The rates of serious treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), TRAEs leading to death, and TRAEs leading to study discontinuation were lower in the erdafitinib group than in the chemotherapy group1
  • In the erdafitinib group, most of the TRAEs were manageable with dose modification and supportive care1


“Overall, this study supported the clinical efficacy of erdafitinib as the standard of care option for patients with mUC and FGRalt after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment”

 

Dr. Yohann Loriot
Department of Cancer Medicine,
INSERM U981,
Gustave Roussy,
Universite Paris-Saclay,
Villejuif, France

Get access to our exclusive articles.