Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2024 Dec;30(12):3728-3736.
doi: 10.1038/s41591-024-03266-2. Epub 2024 Sep 14.

Datopotamab-deruxtecan in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Datopotamab-deruxtecan in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial

Katia Khoury et al. Nat Med. 2024 Dec.

Abstract

Among the goals of patient-centric care are the advancement of effective personalized treatment, while minimizing toxicity. The phase 2 I-SPY2.2 trial uses a neoadjuvant sequential therapy approach in breast cancer to further these goals, testing promising new agents while optimizing individual outcomes. Here we tested datopotamab-deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) in the I-SPY2.2 trial for patients with high-risk stage 2/3 breast cancer. I-SPY2.2 uses a sequential multiple assignment randomization trial design that includes three sequential blocks of biologically targeted neoadjuvant treatment: the experimental agent(s) (block A), a taxane-based regimen tailored to the tumor subtype (block B) and doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (block C). Patients are randomized into arms consisting of different investigational block A treatments. Algorithms based on magnetic resonance imaging and core biopsy guide treatment redirection after each block, including the option of early surgical resection in patients predicted to have a high likelihood of pathological complete response, the primary endpoint. There are two primary efficacy analyses: after block A and across all blocks for the six prespecified breast cancer subtypes (defined by clinical hormone receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status and/or the response-predictive subtypes). We report results of 103 patients treated with Dato-DXd. While Dato-DXd did not meet the prespecified threshold for success (graduation) after block A in any subtype, the treatment strategy across all blocks graduated in the hormone receptor-negative HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- subtype with an estimated pathological complete response rate of 41%. No new toxicities were observed, with stomatitis and ocular events occurring at low grades. Dato-DXd was particularly active in the hormone receptor-negative/HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- signature, warranting further investigation, and was safe in other subtypes in patients who followed the treatment strategy. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01042379 .

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: J.L.M. reports institutional research funding from AstraZeneca, Seagen, Sermonix and Olema and advisory and consulting roles with Pfizer, Seagen, Sermonix, Novartis, Stemline, AstraZeneca, Olema, GlaxoSmithKline and GE Healthcare. C.Y. reports institutional research grant from NCI/NIH; salary support and travel reimbursement from QLHC; a United States patent titled ‘Breast cancer response prediction subtypes’ (no. 18/174,491); and University of California Inventor Share. H.S.R. reports institutional research support from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., F. Hoffmann–La Roche AG/Genentech, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lilly; Merck and Co., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Pfizer, Stemline Therapeutics, OBI Pharma, Ambrx, Greenwich Pharma; and advisory and consulting roles with Chugai, Puma, Sanofi, Napo and Mylan. R.N. reports research funding from Arvinas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Corcept Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, GSK, Merck, Novartis, OBI Pharma, OncoSec, Pfizer, Relay, Seattle Genetics, Sun Pharma and Taiho and advisory roles with AstraZeneca, BeyondSpring, Daiichi Sankyo, Exact Sciences, Fujifilm, GE, Gilead, Guardant Health, Infinity, iTeos, Merck, Moderna, Novartis, OBI, OncoSec, Pfizer, Sanofi, Seagen and Stemline. M.D. reports research grants from NIH/NCI and NIH/NIA, and contracts from PCORI. A.J.C. reports institutional research funding from Merck, Amgen, Puma, Seagen, Pfizer and Olema and advisory roles with AstraZeneca and Genentech. A.Z. reports institutional research funding from Merck, honoraria for Medscape and participation on Pfizer Advisory Board. A.S.C. reports institutional research funding from Novartis and Lilly. A.D.E. reports support from Scorpion, Infinity and Deciphera. E.S.-R. reports grants from V Foundation, NIH, Susan G. Komen; institutional research funding from GSK, Seagen, Pfizer, Lilly; consulting and honoraria from Novartis, Merck, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Lilly; Cancer Awareness Network Board member and support from ASCO and NCCN. J.C.B. reports institutional research funding from Eli Lilly and SymBioSis, participation on the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of Cairn Surgical and honoraria from PER, PeerView, OncLive, EndoMag and UpToDate. C.V. reports institutional research funding from Pfizer, Seagen, H3 Biomedicine/Eisai, AstraZeneca, CytomX; research funding to previous institution from Genentech, Roche, Pfizer, Incyte, Pharmacyclics, Novartis, TRACON Pharmaceuticals, Innocrin Pharmaceuticals, Zymeworks and H3 Biomedicine; advisory and consulting roles with Guidepoint, Novartis, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca and Cardinal Health; unpaid consulting with Genentech; and participation in non-CME activity with Gilead, AstraZeneca. C.O. reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Guardant Health and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. K.S.A. reports institutional research funding from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Seattle Genetics and QLHC; Independent Data and Safety Monitoring committee at Seattle Genetics. K.M.K. reports advisory and consultant roles for Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Puma, 4D Pharma, OncoSec, Immunomedics, Merck, Seagen, Mersana, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Myovant, Takeda, Biotheranostics, Regor, Gilead, Prelude Therapeutics, RayzeBio, eFFECTOR Therapeutics and Cullinan Oncology; and reports institutional research funding from Genentech/Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo and Ascentage. C.I. reports institutional research funding from Tesaro/GSK, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, BMS, Genentech, Novartis and Regeneron; consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, ION, Merck, Medscape, MJH Holdings, Novartis, Pfizer, Puma and Seagen; and royalties from Wolters Kluwer (UptoDate) and McGraw Hill (Goodman and Gillman). J.T. serves as institutional principal investigator for clinical trial with Intuitive Surgical; editor lead for ABS, CGSO, SCORE, Breast Education Committee Track Leader, ASCO SESAP 19 and Breast Co-Chair, ACS. A.T. owns stock at Johnson and Johnsons, Gilead, Bristol Myers Squibb, reports participation on Pfizer Advisory Board: AstraZeneca and reports institutional research funding from Merck and Sanofi and royalties from UptoDate. R.B. reports a consultancy role at Genentech and stock ownership at Cerus Corp. K.Y. received research support unrelated to this work and paid to the institution from Pfizer, Gilead, Seagen, Dantari Pharmaceuticals, Treadwell Therapeutics, and Relay Therapeutics; support from American Cancer Society IRG grant no. IRG-19-230-48-IRG, UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, Specialized Cancer Center support grant NIH/NCI P30CA023100, Curebound Discovery Award (2023, 2024). T.S. reports honoraria from Hologic. L.P. reports institutional research funding from Susan Komen Foundation, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, NCI, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Menarini/Stemline, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck and Co.; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Genentech, Natera, Personalis, Exact Sciences and Stemline/Menarini; patent titled ‘Method of measuring residual cancer and predicting patient survival’ (no. 7711494); and Data and Safety Monitoring Board member of the DYNASTY Breast02, OPTIMA and PARTNER trials. M.S.T. reports institutional research funding from Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Phoenix Molecular Designs, AstraZeneca, Regeneron, Merck and Novartis. A.L.A., P.B. and P.N. are employees of QLHC. G.L.H. reports institutional research grant from NIH (1R01CA255442). W.F.S. reports shares of IONIS Pharmaceuticals and Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, is a cofounder with equity in Delphi Diagnostics and issued patents for (1) a method to calculate residual cancer burden and (2) genomic signature to measure sensitivity to endocrine therapy. J.P. reports honoraria from Methods in Clinical Research—faculty SCION workshop; support from ASCO and advocate scholarship; AACR—SSP program; VIVLI, U Wisc SPORE—EAB, QuantumLEAD—COVID DSMB, PCORI—reviewer and I-SPY advocate lead. P.P. reports institutional research funding from Genentech/Roche, Fabre-Kramer, Advanced Cancer Therapeutics, Caris Centers of Excellence, Pfizer, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Cascadian Therapeutics, Bolt, Byondis, Seagen, Orum Therapeutics and Carisma Therapeutics; consulting fees from Personalized Cancer Therapy, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Immunonet BioSciences, Pfizer, HERON, Puma Biotechnology, Sirtex, CARIS Life sciences, Juniper, Bolt Biotherapeutics and AbbVie; honoraria from DAVA Oncology, OncLive/MJH Life Sciences, Frontiers—publisher, SABCS and ASCO; Speakers’ Bureau: Genentech/Roche (past); United States patent no. 8486413, United States patent no. 8501417, United States patent no. 9023362, United States patent no. 9745377; uncompensated roles with Pfizer, Seagen and Jazz. R.A.S. reports institutional research funding from OBI Pharma, QLHC, AstraZeneca and Gilead, serves on AstraZeneca and Stemline Advisory Boards and Gilead Speaker’s Bureau and reports consultancy role with QLHC. A.D. reports institutional research funding from Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech and NeoGenomics; Program Chair, Scientific Advisory Committee, ASCO. D.Y. reports research funding from NIH/NCI P30 CA 077598, P01 CA234228-01 and R01CA251600, consulting fees from Martell Diagnostics, and honoraria and travel for speaking at the ‘International Breast Cancer Conference.’ L.J.v.V. is a founding advisor and shareholder of Exai Bio and is a part-time employee and owns stock in Agendia. N.M.H. reports institutional research funding from NIH. L.J.E. reports funding from Merck and Co., participation on an advisory board for Blue Cross Blue Shield and personal fees from UpToDate and is an unpaid board member of QLHC. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. I-SPY2.2 study schematic.
Participants receive up to three round (or ‘blocks’) of treatment, depending upon response assessed by MRI. Block A is a platform trial design that randomises participants to one of several arms testing experimental agents or combinations. Patients not responding to treatment in Block A, receive paclitaxel-based standard of care therapy in Block B assigned (or randomised) based on their response-predictive subtype. Those not responding in Block B proceed to treatment in Block C and receive a minimum of AC chemotherapy. All patients complete treatment with definitive surgery. Patients who meet the threshold to have a high probability of RCB 2/3 disease at 6 weeks (based on MRI at 0,3,6 weeks in A or after 6 weeks in B) have the option of skipping the remained of treatment in that block (early treatment redirection to next block).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. CONSORT diagram.
Enrolment period was defined as date of first screening consent from arm to date of arm closure to randomisation (6/27/2022 – 9/1/2023). Numbers of patients that adhered to the protocol specified treatment recommendations for early de-escalation to surgery were also included.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Efficacy of Dato-DXd treatment in Block A.
A) Sankey diagram illustrating how the response-predictive subtypes (RPS) relate to standard HR/HER2 subtypes in the trial, with number of patients of each subtype; B-G) Posterior probability distributions of pCR rate following treatment in Block A with Dato-DXd in each of the four RPS subtypes and HER2− subtypes. Shown is the mean pCR rate with 95% confidence interval (CI), along with the probability [P(> Th)] that the agent is greater than a preset pCR rate threshold set for a specific subtype. If the P(>Th) is greater than 85% for the threshold (dotted vertical line), the agent is said to ‘graduate.’
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. Efficacy of treatment strategies spanning Blocks A-C.
Posterior pCR rate distributions are shown for each RPS subtype (and HR-HER2−) and associated treatment strategy (D = Dato-DXd; T=paclitaxel; C=carboplatin; Pe=pembrolizumab; AC=doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) along with the mean pCR rate and 95% confidence interval (CI).The intent-to-treat population is the solid line. The dashed line represents a sensitivity analysis that considers only patients who adhered to preRCB recommendations following Block A and B treatment to either proceed to surgery. P(>DC) is the probability that the pCR rate of the treatment strategy is superior to a subtype-specific dynamic control (filled grey distribution) that was predefined using cumulative data from I-SPY2 reflecting current best-in-subtype treatment. The threshold for graduation of a treatment strategy is P(> DC) ≥ 0.85. Note that within the HER2-Immune-DRD+ subtype (n=10), 7 patients went to surgery or received non-protocol therapy after Block A and did not proceed to receive Block B treatment. Among the 3 patients proceeding to Block B, 2 were randomised to TCPe; and yielded 9 patients who followed the treatment strategy D/TCPe/ACPe shown in panel D.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Incidence of most frequently observed adverse events.
(A) Incidence of AE of any grade that were experienced by greater than 20% of participants during Block A treatment with Dato-DXd (n=103); (B) Incidence of AE of any grade that were experienced by greater than 20% of patients during any block of treatment (n=103); Note that all grade 3/4 adverse events observed in the study are represented here. The adverse events that were associated only with Blocks B and C are bolded. (C) Immune-related adverse events experienced by participants in any treatment block. Note that 36 participants received pembrolizumab + paclitaxel + carboplatin in Block B and 16 received AC + pembrolizumab in Block C. Note that this does not include the 7 patients who withdrew or received offstudy therapy (which may include pembrolizumab). AEs listed as “combined” refer to iMedDRA combined terms as follows: Stomatitis (Combined): stomatitis, oropharyngeal pain, mouth ulceration, mouth injury, oral pain, gingival pain; Rash (Combined): rash, rash maculo-papular, dermatitis, rash pustular, skin disorder, dermatitis acneiform, rash pruritic, rash erythematous, eczema, urticaria, and rash macular; Ocular events (Combined): keratitis, eye pain, vision blurred, eye irritation, photophobia, eye pruritus, dry eye, photopsia, conjunctivitis, eye infection, eyelid irritation, corneal ulcer, uveitis, corneal opacity, eye disorder; Neuropathy (Combined): peripheral sensory neuropathy, peripheral motor neuropathy, neuropathy peripheral; Neutropenia (combined): febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, and neutrophil count decreased.

References

    1. Nanda R et al. Effect of Pembrolizumab Plus Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Pathologic Complete Response in Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Jama Oncol 6, 676–684 (2020). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schmid P et al. Pembrolizumab for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 810–821 (2020). - PubMed
    1. I-SPY2 Trial Consortium et al. Association of Event-Free and Distant Recurrence–Free Survival With Individual-Level Pathologic Complete Response in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Stages 2 and 3 Breast Cancer. Jama Oncol 6, 1355–1362 (2020). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li W et al. Abstract P4–02-10: MRI models by response predictive subtype for predicting pathologic complete response. Cancer Res 83, P4–02-10-P4–02–10 (2023).
    1. Wolf DM et al. Redefining breast cancer subtypes to guide treatment prioritization and maximize response: Predictive biomarkers across 10 cancer therapies. Cancer Cell 40, 609–623.e6 (2022). - PMC - PubMed

METHODS-ONLY REFERENCES

    1. Lavori PW & Dawson R Introduction to dynamic treatment strategies and sequential multiple assignment randomization. Clin Trials 11, 393–399 (2014). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li W et al. Predicting breast cancer response to neoadjuvant treatment using multi-feature MRI: results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. Npj Breast Cancer 6, 63 (2020). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Symmans WF et al. Measurement of Residual Breast Cancer Burden to Predict Survival After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25, 4414–4422 (2007). - PubMed
    1. Yau C et al. Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: a multicentre pooled analysis of 5161 patients. Lancet Oncol. 23, 149–160 (2022). - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) | Protocol Development | CTEP. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm (2021).

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data