Reference Detail

Ref Type

Journal Article

PMID

(37980854)

Authors

Li J, Zhang J, Zhang Y, Qiu H, Zhou Y, Zhou Y, Zhang X, Zhou Y, Zhu Y, Li Y, Wang M, Shen K, Tao K, Wu X, Wang H, Zhang B, Ling J, Ye Y, Wu X, Qu H, Ma Y, Jiao X, Zheng H, Jin J, Liu Z, Tan M, Fang Y, Zhang P, Zhang N, Lei C, Cai Z, Liang B, Peng Z, Huang Z, Dong J, Shen L

Title

Efficacy and safety of ripretinib vs. sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor previously treated with imatinib: A phase 2, multicenter, randomized, open-label study in China.

Journal	Vol	Issue	Date	Pages	Journal Short Title
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)	196		2024 Jan	113439	Eur J Cancer

URL

Abstract Text

A bridging study of INTRIGUE study to assess the efficacy and safety of ripretinib versus sunitinib as second-line treatment in Chinese GIST patients.This was a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, open-label study in China. GIST patients previously treated with imatinib were randomized (1:1) to receive ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) by continuous dosing in 42-day cycles or sunitinib 50 mg QD in 42-day cycles (four weeks on/two weeks off). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiological review (IRR).Between 6 December 2020 and 15 September 2021, 108 patients were randomized to receive ripretinib (n = 54) or sunitinib (n = 54) (all-patient [AP] intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Seventy patients had primary KIT exon 11 mutations (ripretinib, n = 35; sunitinib, n = 35; Ex11 ITT population). By data cut-off (20 July 2022), in AP ITT population, PFS by IRR was comparable between ripretinib and sunitinib arms (HR 0·99, 95 % CI 0·57, 1·69; nominal p = 0·92; median PFS [mPFS] 10·3 vs 8·3 months). In Ex11 ITT population, PFS by IRR was longer for ripretinib than sunitinib (HR 0·46, 95 % CI 0·23, 0·92; nominal p = 0·03; mPFS not reached in ripretinib arm and 4·9 months in sunitinib arm). Fewer patients experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events with ripretinib (17%) versus sunitinib (56%).Ripretinib demonstrated similar efficacy and a favorable safety profile versus sunitinib as second-line treatment in Chinese GIST patients. Furthermore, ripretinib provided greater clinically meaningful benefit versus sunitinib in patients with KIT exon 11 mutation.

Filtering

Case insensitive filtering will display rows if any text in any cell matches the filter term
Use simple literal full or partial string matches
Separate multiple filter terms with a space. Any order may be used (i. e. a b c and c b a are equivalent )
Filtering will only apply to rows that are already loaded on the page. Filtering has no impact on query parameters.
Use quotes to match on a longer phrase with spaces (i.e. "mtor c1483f")

Sorting

Generally, the default sort order for tables is set to be first column ascending; however, specific tables may set a different default sort order.
Click on any column header arrows to sort by that column
Hold down the Shift key and click multiple columns to sort by more than one column. Be sure to set ascending or descending order for a given column before moving on to the next column.

Molecular Profile	Treatment Approach

Gene Name	Source	Synonyms	Protein Domains	Gene Description	Gene Role

Therapy Name	Drugs	Efficacy Evidence	Clinical Trials

Drug Name	Trade Name	Synonyms	Drug Classes	Drug Description

Gene	Variant	Impact	Protein Effect	Variant Description	Associated with drug Resistance

Molecular Profile	Indication/Tumor Type	Response Type	Therapy Name	Approval Status	Evidence Type	Efficacy Evidence	References
KIT exon11	gastrointestinal stromal tumor	sensitive	Ripretinib	Phase II	Actionable	In a Phase II trial, second-line Qinlock (ripretinib) treatment demonstrated a favorable safety profile and resulted in similar median progression-free survival (mPFS) compared to Sutent (sunitinib) (10.3 vs 8.3 mo, HR=0.99, p=0.92) in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors previously treated with Gleevec (imatinib), longer mPFS (not reached vs 4.9 months, HR=0.46, p=0.03) was observed in patients harboring KIT exon 11 mutations (PMID: 37980854).	37980854