TY - JOUR
T1 - RESILIENT Part 2
T2 - A Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Study of Liposomal Irinotecan Versus Topotecan in Adults with Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer
AU - RESILIENT Trial Investigators
AU - Spigel, David R.
AU - Dowlati, Afshin
AU - Chen, Yuanbin
AU - Navarro, Alejandro
AU - Yang, James Chih Hsin
AU - Stojanovic, Goran
AU - Jove, Maria
AU - Rich, Patricia
AU - Andric, Zoran G.
AU - Wu, Yi Long
AU - Rudin, Charles M.
AU - Chen, Huanyu
AU - Zhang, Li
AU - Yeung, Stanley
AU - Benzaghou, Fawzi
AU - Paz-Ares, Luis
AU - Bunn, Paul A.
AU - Clingan, Philip
AU - Hayes, Theresa
AU - Underhill, Craig
AU - Demey, Wim
AU - Forget, Frederic
AU - Lambrechts, Marc
AU - Nackaerts, Kristiaan
AU - André Franke, Fabio
AU - Azambuja, Alan Arrieira
AU - Guimaraes, Rodrigo
AU - Mourao Dias, Josiane
AU - Santos, Victor
AU - Cezar Uchoa Junior, Bruno
AU - Alves, Gustavo Vasconcelos
AU - De Melo Sette, Claudia Vaz
AU - Bi, Minghong
AU - Cui, Jiuwei
AU - Fang, Jian
AU - Shi, Jianhua
AU - Wang, Ke
AU - Wang, Zhen
AU - Yu, Xinmin
AU - Dayen, Charles
AU - Greillier, Laurent
AU - Quere, Gilles
AU - Baraniskin, Alexander
AU - Bischoff, Helge
AU - Griesinger, Frank
AU - Waller, Cornelius
AU - Csoszi, Tibor
AU - Galffy, Gabriella
AU - Laczo, Ibolya
AU - Shim, Byoung Yong
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© American Society of Clinical Oncology.
PY - 2024/7/1
Y1 - 2024/7/1
N2 - PURPOSEThe phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).PATIENTS AND METHODSPatients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR).RESULTSAmong 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P =.31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P =.71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan.CONCLUSIONLiposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.
AB - PURPOSEThe phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).PATIENTS AND METHODSPatients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR).RESULTSAmong 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P =.31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P =.71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan.CONCLUSIONLiposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85197531929
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.23.02110
DO - 10.1200/JCO.23.02110
M3 - Article
C2 - 38648575
AN - SCOPUS:85197531929
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 42
SP - 2317
EP - 2326
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 19
ER -