YL201 Demonstrates Tolerability, Early Efficacy in Advanced Solid Tumors

News
Article

Among 287 patients across multiple solid tumor indications, YL201 had an objective response rate of 40.8%, with a disease control rate of 83.6%.

The intracranial ORR was 28.5% among 21 evaluable patients with brain metastases at baseline and the median DOR for this subgroup was 6.2 months.

The intracranial ORR was 28.5% among 21 evaluable patients with brain metastases at baseline, and the median DOR for this subgroup was 6.2 months.

YL201, a B7H3-targeting antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and early efficacy in adult patients with advanced solid tumors previously treated with at least 1 standard therapy, according to results from a phase 1/1b trial (NCT05434234; NCT06057922) published in Nature Medicine.

At a median follow-up of 7.5 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.9), the efficacy data from the trial revealed that among 287 patients evaluable for efficacy, the objective response rate (ORR) was 40.8% (95% CI, 35.0%-46.7%). In total, there were 2 confirmed complete responses, and 40.1% of patients experienced a confirmed partial response. A total of 42.9% of patients experienced stable disease as best response for a disease control rate (DCR) of 83.6% (95% CI, 78.8%-87.7%) for this patient population.

Overall, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.9 months (95% CI, 5.5-7.5) and the median duration of response (DOR) was 6.3 months (95% CI, 4.7-6.7). The overall survival (OS) data were not mature as of the data cutoff. The intracranial ORR was 28.5% (95% CI, 11.3%-52.2%) among 21 evaluable patients with brain metastases at baseline; the median DOR for this subgroup was 6.2 months (95% CI, 2.8-not reached).

“To our knowledge, we report here the largest cohort to date for evaluation of a B7H3-targeted ADC in patients with advanced solid tumors…. YL201 demonstrated a manageable safety profile and a promising antitumor activity, particularly in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer [ES-SCLC], nasopharyngeal cancer [NPC], or lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma,” Yuxiang Ma, of the Department of Clinical Research at Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center in Guangzhou, China, wrote in the publication with study coinvestigators. “These findings provide strong confidence for the further development of YL201 in randomized trials.”

The open-label, multicenter phase 1/1b clinical trial enrolled patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors to receive YL201 monotherapy as escalating doses in the dose-escalation portion of the study or at 2.0 mg/kg or 2.4 mg/kg for the dose-expansion portion. Treatment was given until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent in both portions of the study.

Patients in the trial had a median age of 57.0 years (range, 19-87), 93.9% were Asian, and 77.6% were men. A total of 50.0% of patients were never-smokers, 85.3% had an ECOG performance score of 1, and 15.4% had brain metastases at baseline. The median number of organs with metastases was 2 (range, 0-9).

The most common tumor types included ES-SCLC (n = 79), NPC (n = 75), wild-type non–small cell lung cancer (n = 68), and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (n = 37). The median number of prior lines of therapy was 2 (range, 1-10), with 37.2% of patients treated with 1 prior treatment line and 34.9% of patients treated with 3 or more lines of therapy. The most common prior regimens included prior platinum-based chemotherapy (92.9%), prior antiPD-1/PD-L1 therapy (88.5%), and prior radiotherapy (60.3%).

In the phase 1 portion of the trial, the primary end point was dose-limiting toxicities during the initial cycle of study drug. The coprimary end points in the phase 1 b portion of the trial were adverse effects (AEs) and ORR. Secondary end points included pharmacokinetic parameters, DCR, DOR, PFS, best tumor response, and OS.

Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 97.1% of patients. The most common hematologic TRAEs included leukopenia (66.3%), anemia (64.7%), and neutropenia (61.5%). The most common nonhematologic TRAEs included anorexia (35.6%), nausea (26.3%), and hypoalbuminemia (22.8%). Furthermore, grade 3 or higher TRAEs occurred at a rate of 54.5%, with neutropenia (31.7%) being the most frequent grade 3 or higher TRAE.

Additionally, treatment-related severe AEs (SAEs) occurred in 29.2%, resulting in 5.4% of patients experiencing dose discontinuations and 17.0% experiencing dose reductions. Leukopenia was experienced as an SAE in 11.5% of patients, with a median time to first onset of 11.0 days after initiation of study treatment and a median resolution time of 7.5 days. A total of 8 (2.6%) patients died due to study treatment.

Reference

Ma Y, Yang Y, Huang Y, et al. A B7H3-targeting antibody–drug conjugate in advanced solid tumors: a phase 1/1b trial. Nat Med. 2025;31:1949-1957. doi:10.1038/s41591-025-03600-2

Recent Videos
Trials at scale can be conducted in middle-income, low-middle-income, and even lower-income countries if you organize a trial ecosystem.
For example, you have a belt of certain diseases or genetic disorders that you come across, such as sickle cell disease or thalassemia, that are more prevalent in these areas.
Talent shortages in the manufacturing and administration of cellular therapies are problems that must be addressed at the level of each country.
Point-of-care manufacturing, scalable manufacturing, and bringing the cost down [can help].
A novel cancer database may assist patients determine what clinical trials they are eligible to enroll on and identify the next best steps for treatment.
A consolidated database may allow providers to access information on a patient’s prior treatments and genetic abnormalities all in 1 place.
A study presented at ASTRO 2025 evaluated the feasibility of using a unified cancer database to consolidate information gathered across 14 institutions.
Co-hosts Kristie L. Kahl and Andrew Svonavec highlight what to look forward to at the 2025 ESMO Annual Congress, from hot topics and emerging trends to travel recommendations.
Physical therapists may play a key role in patient care before, during, and after treatment for cancer, according to Alison Ankiewicz, PT, DPT.
Related Content