LATIFY Trial

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 2 Q Proffered Paper session : Date Fri, 27.03.2026 LBA2 - ETOP-Roche i-TIMES: Immunotherapy timing investigation on lung cancer Time 14:45 16:15 survival Location Auditorium A1 Presentation Number LBA2 Chairs Sanjay Popat (London, United Kingdom), Antonio Passaro (Milan, Italy) Session Description To view the Session Chair DOI click here Lecture Time 15:25 15:35 Speakers Solange Peters (Lausanne, Switzerland) Q Proffered Paper session : Authors Solange Peters (Lausanne, Switzerland) LBA5 The impact of one-time low-dose CT screening on lung cancer mortality in a non-risk-based population: A prospective non-randomized controlled study Q Proffered Paper session : Presentation Number LBA5 30 - Anti-tumor activity of gotistobart compared to docetaxel in patients with metastatic Lecture Time 14:45 14:55 squamous non-small cell lung cancer (sqNSCLC) progressing on PD-(L)1 inhibitors: Speakers Caichen Li (Guangzhou, China) Stage 1 PRESERVE-003 phase III trial Authors Caichen Li (Guangzhou, China) Presentation Number 30 Lecture Time 15:35 15:45 Q Proffered Paper session : Speakers Kai He (Columbus, OH, United States of America) Invited Discussant LBA5 Authors Kai He (Columbus, OH, United States of America), Byoung Chul Cho (Seoul, Republic of Korea), Lecture Time 14:55 15:05 Rama Balaraman (Ocala, FL, United States of America), Hua-Jen Chen (Guangzhou, China), Speakers Joachim G. Aerts (Rotterdam, Netherlands) Adewale Fawole (The Villages, FL, United States of America), Xinmin Yu (Hangzhou, China), Authors Joachim G. Aerts (Rotterdam, Netherlands) Zhigang Liu (Dongguan, China), Jiliang Zhang (Chengdu, China), John T. Hamm (Louisville, KY, United States of America), Long Wu (Wuhan, China), Bin Yang (Wuhan, China), Q Proffered Paper session : Jennifer Leddon (Cincinnati, OH, United States of America), Yanjing Huang (Haikou, China), Pinhua Pan (Changsha, China), Qiong Wang (Cambridge, MA, United States of America), Q&A and discussion Shiling Song (Rockville, MD, United States of America), Pan Zheng (Rockville, MD, United States of America), Lecture Time 15:05 15:15 Tianhong Li (Sacramento, CA, United States of America), Mark Socinski (Orlando, PA, United States of America), Yi-Long Wu (Guangzhou, China) Q Proffered Paper session : Abstract LBA1 Ceralasertib (C) + durvalumab (D) in patients (pts) with locally advanced (LA) or metastatic (m) NSCLC who progressed on or after anti-PD-(L)1 and platinum-based Q Proffered Paper session : chemotherapy (CT): Results from LATIFY Invited Discussant LBA1, LBA2 and 30 Presentation Number LBA1 Lecture Time 15:15 15:25 Lecture Time 15:45 16:00 Speakers Benjamin Besse (Villejuif, France) Speakers Jhanelle Gray (Tampa, FL, United States of America) Authors Benjamin Besse (Villejuif, France) Authors Jhanelle Gray (Tampa, FL, United States of America)

[Slide 1] LATIFY study design Phase 3, randomised, open-label, multicentre study (NCT05450692) Primary endpoint Key eligibility os Secondary endpoints included: Locally advanced/metastatic Ceralasertib 240 mg PO BID Days 1-7 PFS$ NSCLC without actionable Durvalumab 1500 mg IV on Day 8 Q28D ORR elcc genomic alterations* N=594 (N=299) DoR$ OS at 12 months Eligible for 2L or 3L treatment R PROs following progression on or after 1:1 Safety platinum-based CT and anti-PD-(L)1 therapy Stratified by (concurrent or sequential) Histology (squamous vs non- squamous) Docetaxel 75 mg/m² IV on Day 1 Q21D os and PFS in key subgroups Resistance to prior andi-PD-(L)1 therapy (N=295) ATM protein (<25%/225%) Documented PD-L1 status! (primary in acquired? ATM afteration presence absence)** PD-L1 status (YTN is 21%) Histology (squamous non-equamous) ECOG/WHO PS 0 or 1 Descraphical region North America and Western Europe is PD-L1 expression (<1% 1-49% >50%) other peographical regions) Resistance to prior and PD-(L)1 therapy (primary acquired) TGR and ALK widhge no the ROST RET MET BRAF V000 NTRKY and NTRQ stations Per VENTANA POL (SP283) many Presery resistence NON defined is Income progression 575 form start of peor - PD-(L)1 treatment and acquired resistance - docase progression vss - from the start of por and instruct Unvestgabe assessed per RECIST in the protest expressen - evaluated - he Ventana Y170 many if pro- delined of - (425% total in 925% normal) a unknown) "ATM derations - defend by combining AIM Issue mutstion BONAATM mutation - and ATM protest repression ATM mutations were classified - Intected (dditional or suspected felebrious) not detected NO pathoginic mutations - heAlth one) - unknown a ascend the 1. ALK yephone - ADM Alamis mutal no be day CT, chemotherapy MONA circulating know ONA DeR duration of response E000 Dooperative Group EGFR epidemal growth factor mapler N intravenously ORR response rate OS, overst survive PES progression free survival PO only PROM policed reported outsomes PS performance Q210 every 21 tays COSO every a Says, R condomized RECIST of 1. Response valuation Criteria a Sold Tunors verson 11 WHO Mind Health Organization elcc European Lung Cancer Congress 2026 --- [Slide 2] Conclusions LATIFY did not meet its primary endpoint, ceralasertib + durvalumab did not demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in OS compared with docetaxel - OS HR = 0.90 (95% Cl: 0.75-1.09; p = 0.287); median OS was 11.1 months (95% Cl: 10.0-12.7) in the ceralasertib + durvalumab arm VS 10.0 months (95% Cl: 8.5-11.7) in the docetaxel arm PFS and ORR were also not improved with ceralasertib + durvalumab VS docetaxel - Median PFS was 4.1 months (95% Cl: 3.8-4.4) in the ceralasertib + durvalumab arm VS 4.1 months (95% Cl: 3.5-4.3) in the docetaxel arm - ORR was 7.7% (95% Cl: 4.9-11.3) in the ceralasertib + durvalumab arm VS 17.3% (95% Cl: 13.2-22.1) in the docetaxel arm OS and PFS were generally consistent across prespecified subgroups - In LATIFY, ORR, PFS, and OS among patients with ATM alterations did not replicate the clinical activity observed in HUDSON Ceralasertib + durvalumab was tolerable and AEs were consistent with the known safety profiles of each agent --- [Slide 3] Secondary endpoint: Progression-free survival 1.0 Ceralasertib + Docetaxel durvalumab (n=299) (n=295) 0.8 Events, (%) 262 (87.6) 236 (80.0) mPFS, months (95% CI) 4.1 (3.8-4.4) 4.1(3.5-4.3) HR (95% CI) 0.87 (0.73-1.04) 0.6 Nominal p-value 0.133 Extramenting Probability of PFS Median duration of follow-up in 16.6 (0-31) 0.8 (0-29) elcc censored patients, months (range) 0.4 0.2 0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 No. at risk Time from randomisation (months) Certificate 200 176 98 56 43 34 24 0 2 1 1 0 ourvalured Docetased 295 151 01 a 10 13 11 5 3 1 0 0 Data a October 00. 2025 Tick marks indicate consored data The 95% Cla for mPFS were calculated using the Brookneyer Crowdey method The HR and associated 95% Cla were calculated from a strattlied Cox proportional hazands model mPFS median progression- the service elcc European Lung Cancer Congress 2026 --- [Slide 4] Primary endpoint: Overall survival 1.0 Ceralasertib + Docetaxel durvalumab (n=299) (n=295) 0.8 Events, (%) 214(71.6) 219 (74.2) mOS, months (95% CI) 11.1(10.0-12.7) 10.0 (8.5-11.7) HR (95% CI) 0.90 (0.75-1.09) elcc Probability of os 0.6 p-value 0.287 Median duration of follow-up in 19.9 (0-32) 19.5(0-31) 40.2% - censored patients, months (range) 0.4 43.0% 0.2 0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 No. risk Time from randomisation (months) Certificate 200 258 202 100 durvalurnab 127 101 11 43 22 9 5 0 Doortased 255 234 185 145 110 97 78 47 24 11 1 0 Date a October 06, 2025 Tick marks indicate ownered date The 95% Chs for nos were calculated wing the Brookmeyer Crewtity method The HR and associated 95% Ch were calculated tom straided Cox perportional hazanda model The significance level by testing os at his final analysis - 4. 15% 2 sided) at the oversl 4. 90% level allowing for strong elpha control across interm and trat analysis Imports nos median overal survival elcc European Lung Cancer Congress 2026

[Slide 1] Background Pts with advanced NSCLC and disease progression on or after anti-PD-(L)1 + platinum-based CT (concurrent or sequential) have limited treatment (tx) options. The phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicentre LATIFY study (NCT05450692) evaluated C (a selective inhibitor of the ATR DNA damage response kinase) + D (anti-PD-L1) VS docetaxel in pts with LA/mNSCLC, without actionable genomic alterations, after progression on or after anti-PD- (L)1 and platinum-based CT. We report results of the primary and final analysis. Methods Pts had to be eligible for second- or third-line tx after progression on or after prior anti-PD-(L)1 and platinum- based CT, have known tumour cell PD-L1 status and ECOG/WHO performance status 0/1. Pts were randomized 1:1 to C 240 mg orally, twice daily on Days 1-7 + D 1500 mg IV on Day 8 of a 28-day cycle or docetaxel 75 mg/m² IV on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle, until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) (both alpha controlled; investigator-assessed per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Results In total, 594 pts were randomized: 299 to C+D and 295 to docetaxel. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms. At this final analysis (data cutoff: 6 Oct 2025), C+D showed no statistically significant OS benefit VS docetaxel, with no improvements in PFS or ORR (Table). OS was generally consistent across prespecified subgroups. In the C+D VS docetaxel arms, any grade tx-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 86.2% VS 85.8% of pts, and were grade ≥3 in 26.9% VS 43.8%; all-cause AEs leading to any tx discontinuation occurred in 7.7% VS 11.3% of pts. Table: LBA1 Docetaxel C+D (n=299) (n=295) OS Median duration of follow-up in censored pts, mo 19.9 (0-32) 19.5 (0-31) (range) Median OS, mo (95% CI) 11.1 (10.0-12.7) 10.0 (8.5-11.7) 12-mo OS rate, % (95% CI) 46.3 (40.4-52.1) 43.6 (37.6-49.4) 0.90 (0.75- HR (95% CI)2-sided p-value 1.09)0.287 PFS Median PFS, mo (95% CI) 4.1 (3.8-4.4) 4.1 (3.5-4.3) 6-mo rate, % (95% CI) 35.3 (29.8-40.9) 33.5 (27.8-39.4) 0.87 (0.73- HR (95% CI)Nominal 2-sided p-value 1.04)0.133 ORR, % (95% CI) 7.7 (4.9-11.3) 17.3 (13.2-22.1) Docetaxel C (n=297) D (n=297) (n=274) Median duration of exposure, mo (range) 4.5 (0.4-31.9) 3.8 (0-31.7) 3.0 (0.3-27.6) CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; mo, months. Conclusions C+D did not demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in OS VS docetaxel. C+D had manageable toxicity and AEs were consistent with the known safety profiles of each agent.

[Slide 1] LATIFY study design Phase 3, randomised, open-label, multicentre study (NCT05450692) Primary endpoint: Key eligibility OS Secondary endpoints included: Locally advanced/metastatic Ceralasertib 240 mg PO BID Days 1-7 PFSS NSCLC without actionable Durvalumab 1500 mg IV on Day 8 Q28D ORRI N=594 (N=299) genomic alterations* DoR% elcc European Lung OS at 12 months Cancer Congress 2026 Eligible for 2L or 3L treatment PROs R Safety following progression on or after 1:1 platinum-based CT and Stratified by: Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 V on Day 1 Q21D OS and PFS in key subgroups: anti-PD-(L)1 therapy Histology (squamous vs non-squamous) ATM protein <<25% >25% (N=295) (concurrent or sequential) Resistance to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy ATM alteration (presence absence)* (primary vs acquired): Histology (squamous non-squamous) PD-L1 status (<1% vs >1%) PD-L1 expression (<1% 1-49%/250%) Documented PD-L1 status+ Resistance to prior anti- PD-(L)1 therapy Geographical region ECOG/WHO PS 0 or 1 (North America and Western Europe vs (primary acquired) other geographical regions) BRAF V600, NTRK1 and NTRK2 alterations, Per PD-(L)1 VENTANAPO-L1 treatment, Nevestigakor (SP263) mmurchistochematry assessed CIONAATM pet RECIST nut :Primary resistance was defined as evaluated disease progression using the Ventana <16 weeks Y170 status, from immunohistochemistry start and of ATM prior protein anti- PD-(L)1 assay expression EGFR anaplastic treatment at and pre-defined ALK ATM lymphoma and wildtype, mutations cut-offs acquired kinase, no were (<25% known resistance ATM, classified [loss] ROS1, Alaxia growth as vs. as RET, disease telangiectasia >25% detected factor MET, (normal) progression receptor, (deleterious mutated, vs. unknown); IV, >16 v1.1, intravenously, or BID, weeks suspected Response twice "ATM from daily, the deleterious). ORR, alterations Evaluation start CT, objective chemotherapy of poor were not Critena anb response detected defined n dIDNA Solid by (no rate, combining Tumors, pathogenic circulating OS, overall version ATM mutations tumour survival issue 1.1, DNA mutation, WHO, n PFS, the DoR World progression ATM duration gene), Health or D ATM protein PO, expression orally, PROs, was patient-reported outcomes, 2L, second-line; PS, ECOG, performance 3L, Eastern third-line; status, Cooperative ALK, Q210, every Oncology 21 days, Group, Q28D, EGFR, every epidermal 28 days, R, randomized; RECIST Cancer Congress 2026 C --- [Slide 2] Secondary endpoint: Objective response rate Objective response* Evaluable patients with response, Ceralasertib durvalumab Objective response rate, % (95% CII) n (n=299) elcc Docetaxel European Lung Best objective response, n (%) (n=295) Cancer Congress 2026 23 Complete response 7.7 (4.9-11.3) 51 Partial response 17.3(13.2-22.1) Stable disease 1(0.3) Progressive disease 22(7.4) 0 89 (29.8) 51(17.3) Not evaluable 54(18.3) 110(36.8) Duration of response 104(35.3) 77 (25.8) 86(29.2) Patients with a response, n Median, months (95% CI$) 23 51 16.9 (4.4-NC) 4.4(3.9-5.8) Data culcif October 06,2025 "Includes unconfirmed responses per investigator assessment and RECIST vii Calculated using the Clopper Peanon method Median duration of response was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method 95% Cls for median duration of response were calculated using the Brockmeyer Crowley netho NC, not calculal European Lung Cancer Congress 2026 --- [Slide 3] Primary 1.0 endpoint: Overall survival 0.8 elcc Ceralasertib European Lung Cancer Congress 2026 Probability of OS 0.6 + durvalumab Docataxel Events, (%) (n=299) mos, months (95% CI) 214(71.6) (m=295) HR (95% Ci) 11.1 46.3% (10.0-127) 219(74.2) 0.4 p-value 0.90 (0.75-1.09) 10.0(8.5-11.7) Median duration of follow-up in 0.287 43.6% censored patients, months (range) 19.9 (0-32) 19.5(0-31) 0.2 0 0 3 6 9 12 15 No. at risk 18 21 24 27 Ceralasertib Time from randomisation (months) 30 33 + durvalumab 299 258 202 169 127 101 81 43 22 9 6 0 Docetaxel 295 238 185 146 116 97 78 47 24 11 3 0 Data culcit October 06, 2025 Tick marks ndicate cersoned data The 95% Cls for mOS were calculated using be Brookmeyer Crowley meto The HR and associated 95% Cls were calculated from a stratified Cox proportional hazands mod The significance level for testing OS al this final analysis was 4.15% 2 sided) at the overall 4.99% level, allowing for strong alpha control across interim and final analysis limepo mOS, median overall so European Lung Cancer Congress 2026 --- [Slide 4] Secondary 1.0 endpoint: Duration of response 0.8 elcc Proportion of patients still in response Ceralasertib 0.6 durvalumab Docataxel European Lung Events, (%) (n=299) Cancer Congress 2026 Median DoR, months (95% CI) 23(7.7) (m=295) 16.9(4.4-NC) 51 (17,3) 44(3.9-5.8) 0.4 Exploratory analyses Characteristic Patients with response in the 0.2 coralasortib durvalumab arm Histology, n (n=23) Squamous non-squamous PD-L1 expression, n 5/18 0 <1% 1-49% >50% 10/7/6 ATM protein status, n. 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 Loss (<25%) Normal (>25%) Unknown 24 27 N at months 30 4/15/4 Time (months) Resistance to prior PD-(L)1 therapy, Ceralasertib Primary Acquired 3/20 23 19 15 durvalumab 13 13 7 4 1 1 0 0 Docetaxel 51 35 16 5 5 4 1 1 1 1 0 Data culcift October 06, 2025 Tick marks indicate censored data This analysis only includes patients with an objective response Duration of response is the time from the first documentation of complete or partial response until the date of progression or death For patients without disease progression or death, the PFS censoning date 405 used European Lung Cancer Congress 2026

OCR text not available for this slide. View the original post on X for context.