Efficacy and Safety of TRC105 Plus Pazopanib vs Pazopanib Alone for Treatment of Patients With Advanced Angiosarcoma
Authors: Robin L. Jones, Vinod Ravi, Andrew S. Brohl, Sant Chawla, Kristen N. Ganjoo, Antoine Italiano, Steven Attia, Melissa A. Burgess, Katherine Thornton, Lee D. Cranmer, Maggie Chon U. Cheang, Lingyun Liu, Liz Robertson, Bonne Adams, Charles Theuer, Robert G. Maki
Journal: JAMA Oncology (2022)

<h3>Importance</h3> Angiosarcoma is a rare sarcoma subtype with a poor outcome. Carotuximab plus pazopanib produced a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 7.8 months in pazopanib-naive patients with chemotherapy-refractory angiosarcoma in a phase 1/2 trial. <h3>Objective</h3> To determine whether carotuximab plus pazopanib improves PFS compared with pazopanib alone in patients with advanced angiosarcoma. <h3>Design, Setting, and Participants</h3> The TAPPAS Trial: An Adaptive Enrichment Phase 3 Trial of TRC105 and Pazopanib vs Pazopanib Alone in Patients With Advanced Angiosarcoma was a multinational, multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 randomized clinical trial of 123 patients 18 years or older with advanced angiosarcoma that was conducted between February 16, 2017, and April 12, 2019, at 31 sites in the US and the European Union. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib alone or carotuximab plus pazopanib. The trial incorporated an adaptive enrichment design. Inclusion criteria were no more than 2 prior lines of systemic therapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. The efficacy analysis used the intent-to-treat population; the safety analysis included all patients who received a dose of either study drug. <h3>Exposures</h3> Oral pazopanib, 800 mg/d, or intravenous carotuximab, 10 mg/kg, administered weekly, plus oral pazopanib, 800 mg/d, with dose modification allowed per patient tolerance or until disease progression. <h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3> The primary end point was PFS, assessed by blinded independent radiographic and cutaneous photographic review per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines, version 1.1. Secondary end points included the objective response rate and overall survival. An interim analysis to determine the final sample size was conducted after enrollment of 123 patients. PFS in the group receiving pazopanib alone was compared with PFS in the group receiving carotuximab plus pazopanib using the log rank test. <h3>Results</h3> Of 114 patients with evaluable data (53 in the pazopanib arm and 61 in the carotuximab plus pazopanib arm), 69 (61%) were female and the median age was 68 years (range, 24-82 years); 57 (50%) had cutaneous disease and 32 (28%) had had no prior treatment. The primary end point (PFS) was not reached (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.52-1.84;<i>P</i> = .95), with a median of 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.9 months to not reached) for pazopanib and 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.8-8.3 months) for the combination arm. The most common all-grade adverse events in the single-agent pazopanib arm vs the combination arm were fatigue (29 patients [55%] vs 37 [61%]), headache (12 patients [23%] vs 39 [64%]), diarrhea (27 patients [51%] vs 35 [57%]), nausea (26 patients [49%] vs 29 [48%]), vomiting (12 patients [23%] vs 23 [38%]), anemia (5 patients [9%] vs 27 [44%]), epistaxis (2 patients [4%] vs 34 [56%]), and hypertension (29 patients [55%] vs 22 [36%]). <h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3> In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, carotuximab plus pazopanib did not improve PFS compared with pazopanib alone in patients with advanced angiosarcoma. <h3>Trial Registration</h3> ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT02979899