METHODS: The development of PANORAMA encompassed 3 phases: operationalization, consensus building, and piloting. PANORAMA aimed to capture the elements of the PNO care continuum through domains with weighted assessments reflecting their importance. Responses were ordinally scored to reflect the level of satisfaction. PANORAMA was revised based on feedback at various phases to improve its relevance, usability, and clarity.
RESULTS: The operationalization phase identified 14 domains by using 252 questions. The consensus phase involved 15 experts (6 pediatric oncologists, 3 radiation oncologists, 2 neurosurgeons, 2 radiologists, and 2 pathologists). The consensus phase validated the identified domains, questions, and scoring methodology. The PANORAMA domains included national context, hospital infrastructure, organization and service integration, human resources, financing, laboratory, neurosurgery, diagnostic imaging, pathology, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, supportive care, and patient outcomes. PANORAMA was piloted at 13 institutions in 12 countries, representing diverse patient care contexts. Face validity was assessed by examining the correlation between the estimated score by respondents and calculated PANORAMA scores for each domain (r = 0.67, P
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC who progressed following osimertinib and platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous or intravenous amivantamab, both combined with lazertinib. Co-primary pharmacokinetic noninferiority endpoints were trough concentrations (Ctrough; on cycle-2-day-1 or cycle-4-day-1) and cycle-2 area under the curve (AUCD1-D15). Key secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS) was a predefined exploratory endpoint.
RESULTS: Overall, 418 patients underwent randomization (subcutaneous group, n=206; intravenous group, n=212). Geometric mean ratios of Ctrough for subcutaneous to intravenous amivantamab were 1.15 (90% CI, 1.04-1.26) at cycle-2-day-1 and 1.42 (90% CI, 1.27-1.61) at cycle-4-day-1; the cycle-2 AUCD1-D15 was 1.03 (90% CI, 0.98-1.09). ORR was 30% in the subcutaneous and 33% in the intravenous group; median PFS was 6.1 and 4.3 months, respectively. OS was significantly longer in the subcutaneous versus intravenous group (hazard ratio for death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92; nominal P=0.02). Fewer patients in the subcutaneous group experienced infusion-related reactions (13% versus 66%) and venous thromboembolism (9% versus 14%) versus the intravenous group. Median administration time for first infusion was reduced to 4.8 minutes (range, 0-18) for subcutaneous amivantamab from 5 hours (range, 0.2-9.9) for intravenous amivantamab. During cycle-1-day-1, 85% and 52% of patients in the subcutaneous and intravenous groups, respectively, considered treatment convenient; end-of-treatment rates were 85% and 35%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Subcutaneous amivantamab-lazertinib demonstrated noninferiority to intravenous amivantamab-lazertinib, offering a consistent safety profile with reduced infusion-related reactions, increased convenience, and prolonged survival.