Tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy targeting delta-like ligand 3 and CD3, showed promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 trial in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. In this phase 2 trial, we evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of tarlatamab, administered intravenously every 2 weeks at a dose of 10 mg or 100 mg, in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response), as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Overall, 220 patients received tarlatamab; patients had previously received a median of two lines of treatment. Among patients evaluated for antitumor activity and survival, the median follow-up was 10.6 months in the 10-mg group and 10.3 months in the 100-mg group. An objective response occurred in 40% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 52) of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 32% (97.5% CI, 21 to 44) of those in the 100-mg group. Among patients with an objective response, the duration of response was at least 6 months in 59% (40 of 68 patients). Objective responses at the time of data cutoff were ongoing in 22 of 40 patients (55%) in the 10-mg group and in 16 of 28 patients (57%) in the 100-mg group. The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.7) in the 10-mg group and 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 4.4) in the 100-mg group; the estimates of overall survival at 9 months were 68% and 66% of patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were cytokine-release syndrome (in 51% of the patients in the 10-mg group and in 61% of those in the 100-mg group), decreased appetite (in 29% and 44%, respectively), and pyrexia (in 35% and 33%). Cytokine-release syndrome occurred primarily during treatment cycle 1, and events in most of the patients were grade 1 or 2 in severity. Grade 3 cytokine-release syndrome occurred less frequently in the 10-mg group (in 1% of the patients) than in the 100-mg group (in 6%). A low percentage of patients (3%) discontinued tarlatamab because of treatment-related adverse events. Tarlatamab, administered as a 10-mg dose every 2 weeks, showed antitumor activity with durable objective responses and promising survival outcomes in patients with previously treated small-cell lung cancer. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Amgen; DeLLphi-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05060016.).

PURPOSE: The randomized, open-label, global phase III TROPION-Lung01 study compared the efficacy and safety of datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) versus docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced/metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received Dato-DXd 6 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m ² once every 3 weeks. Dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: In total, 299 and 305 patients were randomly assigned to receive Dato-DXd or docetaxel, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) with Dato-DXd and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 4.2) with docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91]; P = .004). The median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI, 11.0 to 13.9) and 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.8), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.14]; P = .530). In the prespecified nonsquamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 5.5 versus 3.6 months (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.79]) and the median OS was 14.6 versus 12.3 months (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.05]). In the squamous histology subgroup, the median PFS was 2.8 versus 3.9 months (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.08]) and the median OS was 7.6 versus 9.4 months (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.92]). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25.6% and 42.1% of patients, and any-grade adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis occurred in 8.8% and 4.1% of patients, in the Dato-DXd and docetaxel groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dato-DXd significantly improved PFS versus docetaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, driven by patients with nonsquamous histology. OS showed a numerical benefit but did not reach statistical significance. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

PURPOSE: The open-label, phase III EVOKE-01 study evaluated sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus standard-of-care docetaxel in metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with progression on/after platinum-based chemotherapy, anti–PD-(L)1, and targeted treatment for actionable genomic alterations (AGAs). Primary analysis is reported. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by histology, best response to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen, and AGA treatment received or not) to SG (one 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8) or docetaxel (one 75 mg/m² intravenous infusion on day 1) in 21-day cycles. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, patient-reported symptom assessment, and safety. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat population (SG, n = 299; docetaxel, n = 304), 55.4% had one previous line of therapy. Median follow-up was 12.7 months (range, 6.0-24.0). The primary end point was not met. There was a numerical OS improvement for SG versus docetaxel (median, 11.1 v 9.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.04]; one-sided P = .0534), consistent across squamous and nonsquamous histologies. Median PFS was 4.1 versus 3.9 months (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.11]). An OS benefit was observed for SG (n = 192) versus docetaxel (n = 191) in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen (3.5-month median OS increase; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.97]); this was consistent across histologies. Among patients receiving SG and docetaxel, 6.8% and 14.2% discontinued because of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), respectively; 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, had TRAEs leading to death. CONCLUSION: Although statistical significance was not met, OS numerically improved with SG versus docetaxel, which was consistent across histologies. Clinically meaningful improvement in OS was noted in mNSCLC nonresponsive to last anti–PD-(L)1–containing regimen. SG was better tolerated than docetaxel and consistent with its known safety profile, with no new safety signals.