麻豆果冻传媒影音

Purpose

The phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Patients and Methods

Patients 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).

Results

Among 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 0.90-1.37], P=0.31). 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 0.77-1.20, nominal P=0.71); ORR per BICR was 44.1%, 95% CI 37.6-50.8 and 21.6% (95% CI 16.4-27.4), 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.

Conclusion

Liposomal 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.

Read a Q&A related to the study here and expert commentary about it here.