Activity of Tepotinib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) with High-Level MET Amplification (metamp): Preclinical and Clinical Evidence.

Sandrine Faivre,Jean‐Frédéric Blanc,Hongming Pan,Véronique Grando,Ho Yeong Lim,Antonio Cubillo Gracián,Nicolás Isambert,Andreas Johne,Karl Schumacher,Christopher Stroh,Manja Friese‐Hamim,Aurora O’Brate,Dongli Zhou,Shukui Qin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2021.39.3_suppl.329
IF: 45.3
2021-01-01
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:329 Background: Tepotinib, a potent and highly selective MET inhibitor, showed promising activity in advanced HCC with MET overexpression in two Phase Ib/II trials, which both met their primary endpoints. One trial enrolled Asian patients (pts) without prior systemic therapy (first line [1L]; NCT01988493) and one enrolled US/European pts with prior sorafenib (second line [2L]; NCT02115373). By investigator assessment, objective response rates and disease control rates with tepotinib in Phase II were 15.8% and 60.5% in 1L (n = 38), and 8.2% and 57.1% in 2L (n = 49). Outcomes appeared better in pts with METamp. Thus, we further investigated the preclinical and clinical activity of tepotinib in HCC, focusing on high-level METamp, which could be an oncogenic driver in this tumor type. Methods: Preclinical activity was assessed in 37 HCC pt-derived xenografts (PDXs) in nude mice treated with tepotinib (100 mg/kg, Days 1–5, every 7 days for five cycles; 6–12 replicates per PDX). Clinical activity was assessed by analyzing pts with METamp or high-level METamp (defined as mean MET gene copy number [GCN] ≥5 and ≥10, respectively; by fluorescence in situ hybridization), who received tepotinib 500 mg in Phase Ib or II of the 1L and 2L trials (n = 121). In the Phase Ib part of the 1L trial, pts could have received prior treatment. Results: Molecular profiling revealed high-level METamp in two of 37 HCC PDXs: LIM612 ( MET GCN 47.1) and LIPF210 ( MET GCN 44). Tepotinib induced significant tumor regression in both of these high-level METamp HCC PDX models (mean tumor volume reduction: 97% and 96%, respectively). Across the two trials, 15 pts treated with tepotinib 500 mg had METamp, of whom five had an objective response (one complete response [CR] and four partial responses [PRs]) and six had stable disease (SD) as best overall response. Four pts had high-level METamp (mean MET GCN 14.3, 18.1, 30.2, and 36.2), with best overall response of CR in one pt, PR in two pts and SD in one pt (Table). One pt with high-level METamp (mean MET GCN 14.3) treated with 1L tepotinib was still receiving treatment as of Sept 2020 (total tepotinib treatment duration: > 45 months). Conclusions: High-level METamp may be an oncogenic driver in HCC that sensitizes tumors to MET inhibition with tepotinib. Compared with MET overexpression, high-level METamp could be a better predictive biomarker for MET inhibitors in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01988493, NCT02115373. [Table: see text]
What problem does this paper attempt to address?