Initial results from NEXUS-01, a phase 1 study of LY4052031, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting Nectin-4, in participants with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Abstract
4508 Background: Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (EVP) is the current first-line standard of care for locally advanced / metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, subsequent treatment options are limited, representing an urgent and growing unmet need. Preclinical data suggest that EV resistance may be payload mediated and consequently Nectin-4 remains a viable target for alternative therapies. LY4052031 is a next generation anti-Nectin-4 ADC, comprising a humanized IgG1 antibody conjugated to Camp98, a novel topoisomerase I inhibitor, via a cleavable peptide linker with homogeneous drug antibody ratio of 8. Here, we report the initial clinical data from the phase 1 dose escalation cohort of NEXUS-01 (NCT06465069). Methods: Adults with locally advanced / mUC or other selected solid tumors were eligible. Participants (pts) must have received or were ineligible for available standard therapies, and have ECOG PS 0-1. Dose escalation utilized a Bayesian optimal interval design. Key endpoints were safety, PK, and antitumor activity of LY4052031 per RECIST v1.1. Results: As of 25 Nov 2025, 70 pts (47 mUC, 23 non-UC) received LY4052031 doses ranging from 0.6-5.4 mg/kg IV Q3W. Median age was 66 years (range, 31-82); 60% had ECOG PS 1. Among pts with mUC, 70% (33/47) had prior EV (6% [2/33] had discontinued EV due to treatment-related toxicity). LY4052031, total antibody, and Camp98 exhibited mostly linear, dose-proportional PK, except at 4.8-5.4 mg/kg for payload. The most common treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were nausea (43%), alopecia (39%), fatigue (37%), decreased appetite (29%), constipation, diarrhea, dysgeusia, mucositis, vomiting (27% each), and anemia (24%). The most common grade ≥3 TEAE was anemia (13%). Low activity scores (AS) for CYP2D6, the metabolic clearance pathway for Camp98, were associated with increased dose-limiting toxicity at higher dose levels. Thus, the study was amended to require CYP2D6 genotyping prior to treatment with dedicated dose finding in pts with low AS ( < 0.5). Response was assessed in efficacy evaluable pts, defined as all treated pts who had at least 1 post-baseline response assessment or who discontinued prior to the first post-baseline response assessment. In 21 efficacy evaluable mUC pts (AS ≥0.5) treated with 2.4-4.8 mg/kg, ORR was 48% (10/21) and DCR was 81% (17/21) with 1 CR, 9 PR, and 7 SD. Among those who had prior EV (8 EV and 7 EV/P), ORR was 40% (6/15) and DCR was 80% (12/15) with 1 CR, 5 PR, and 6 SD; in the EV naïve pts, ORR was 67% (4/6) and DCR was 83% (5/6) with 4 PR and 1 SD. Median follow-up was 7 months (95% CI, 2.79-NE); median DoR was 7 months (95% CI, 2.7-NE). Conclusions: LY4052031 demonstrated promising clinical activity at multiple dose levels, including in EV pre-treated mUC. CYP2D6 AS specific dose optimization is ongoing and updated results will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT06465069 .
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Gopa Iyer
Xin Gao
Alexander Z. Wei
Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
Inkeun Park
Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
Kei Muro
Department of Clinical Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan
Peter H. O'Donnell
University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
Benjamin Garmezy
Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, TN
Matthew D. Galsky
Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Anthony M. Joshua
Immunology Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research
Amita Patnaik
Nehal J. Lakhani
The START Center for Cancer Research, Grand Rapids, MI
Alejandro Falcon Gonzalez
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain
Daniel Castellano Gauna
Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
Alexander Philipovskiy
Florida Cancer Specialists, Lake Mary
Justin A. Call
The START Center for Cancer Research, Mountain Region, West Valley City, UT
Abhishek Tripathi
Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center Duarte California USA
Amy E. Chang
Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN
Elizabeth A. Martin
Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN
Hongmei Han
11Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, United States
Thomas Powles
Department of Medical Oncology Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK