Cited by 38Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentOvarian function and disordersBRCA gene mutations in cancer

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Initial efficacy and safety results from ENGOT-ov60/GOG-3052/RAMP 201: A phase 2 study of avutometinib (VS-6766) ± defactinib in recurrent low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC).

Open access

Abstract

5515 Background: LGSOC is a RAS/MAPK pathway driven cancer that constitutes ≤10% of ovarian cancer. There are no FDA approved treatments specifically for LGSOC. Avutometinib is a novel small molecule RAF/MEK clamp. Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) activation is a resistance mechanism to RAF/MEK inhibition, and defactinib, a small molecule inhibitor of FAK, has shown synergistic antitumor activity with avutometinib in preclinical models. The combination of avutometinib and defactinib has demonstrated a high rate of confirmed and durable responses (overall response rate [ORR] = 46%) in recurrent LGSOC (Banerjee S, ESMO 2021). Methods: A registration-directed phase 2, adaptive, multicenter, randomized study was initiated to evaluate avutometinib ± defactinib in patients with KRAS mutant (mt) and KRAS wild-type (wt) recurrent LGSOC to identify the optimal regimen based on confirmed ORR by blinded independent central review (Part A) and determine the efficacy of the optimal regimen (Part B) (NCT04625270). Pts were randomized to avutometinib 4 mg orally (PO), twice weekly, 3 weeks on, 1 week off (mono) or avutometinib 3.2 mg PO twice weekly + defactinib 200 mg PO BID 3 weeks on, 1 week off (combo). Key inclusion criteria include histologically confirmed recurrent LGSOC, known KRAS status and prior systemic therapy with platinum chemotherapy. Unlimited additional prior lines, including prior MEK inhibitor, were permitted. Here we present efficacy results from Part A (evaluable patients, N=59) and safety data from all pts enrolled (N=121). Results: In Part A, the median number of prior systemic regimens was 3 for mono, and 4 for combo. In evaluable patients, a confirmed ORR of 7% (2/30) was observed for mono (13% KRAS mt, 0% KRAS wt), and an ORR of 28% (8/29) was observed for combo (27% KRAS mt, 29% KRAS wt). Two of 4 patients previously treated with a MEK inhibitor showed a confirmed partial response (PR) on the combination arm. A high disease control rate (PR or SD ≥ 8 weeks) was observed for both mono (90%) and combo (93%). The majority of treatment related adverse events (AEs, any grade) for combo (N=57) were mild to moderate. The most common Grade ≥3 AEs for combo were blood CPK increase (15.8%), fatigue (5.3%), diarrhea (3.5%), dermatitis acneiform (1.8%), and rash (1.8%). A similar AE profile was observed for mono (N=64). Most AEs were manageable/reversible. On the combo arm, 90.6% (±20%) of planned doses were given and 9% (n=5) of pts discontinued due to AEs [asymptomatic elevated blood CPK (n=3) and fatigue (n=2)]. Conclusions: The interim data support avutometinib + defactinib as an active go-forward regimen in heavily-pretreated recurrent LGSOC, regardless of KRAS status. No new safety signals were observed, and most AEs were mild to moderate. Enrollment continues in Part B for the combination of avutometinib and defactinib. Clinical trial information: NCT04625270 .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.5515

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a phase I/II trial, the objective response rate to combination therapy was 15.0% in patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC and 44.8% in those with LGSOC.

    “In this phase I/II trial, the objective response rate to combination therapy was 15.0% in patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC and 44.8% in those with LGSOC [18, 19, 48, 49].”

    From Epithelial-mesenchymal transition status is a remarkable biomarker for the combination treatment with avutometinib and defactinib in KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (2024) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results (Poster Discussion Session, p. 1) report a 28% objective response rate for the combination in recurrent LGSOC, not 44.8%. The Methods on the same page describe a phase 2 study of LGSOC; this paper does not report a response rate for KRAS-mutated NSCLC. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The combination of avutometinib and the FAK inhibitor defactinib has demonstrated clinical efficacy in both KRAS-mutated NSCLC and low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC).

    “The combination of avutometinib and the FAK inhibitor defactinib has demonstrated clinical ef fi cacy in both KRAS-mutated NSCLC and low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) [18 -20].”

    From Epithelial-mesenchymal transition status is a remarkable biomarker for the combination treatment with avutometinib and defactinib in KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (2024) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Poster Discussion Session (p. 1) reports a 28% confirmed response rate for avutometinib plus defactinib in recurrent LGSOC and identifies defactinib as a FAK inhibitor. It does not address clinical efficacy in KRAS-mutated NSCLC, the other disease named in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Banerjee, S. N., Ring, K. L., Van Nieuwenhuysen, E., Fabbro, M., Aghajanian, C., Oaknin, A., Colombo, N., Santin, A., Clamp, A. R., Moore, K. N., Rose, P. G., O'Malley, D. M., Chon, H. S., Salinas, E. A., Prendergast, E. N., Lustgarten, S., Rodrigues, M., Gennigens, C., Monk, B. J., & Grisham, R. N.
Affiliations
  • Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
  • Institut Regional du Cancer de Montpellier (FR)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari (ES)
  • European Institute of Oncology (IT)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center (US)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • The Ohio State University and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • Compass Oncology (US)
  • Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium (US)
  • Verastem (United States) (US)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège (BE)
  • Creighton University (US)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2023-06-01
Volume
41
Issue
16_suppl
Pages
5515-5515
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W4379282137
Cited by
38
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 3
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Verastem Oncology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Keywords
avutometinib, defactinib, focal adhesion kinase inhibition, KRAS mutation, RAS/MAPK pathway, combination therapy, overall response rate, progression-free survival, treatment safety, adverse events, platinum-refractory ovarian cancer, adaptive trial design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review