Unlike immunotherapy, where re-challenge after progression is dubious, there is an emerging clinical practice of re-challenging patients with the same antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), such as enfortumab vedotin (EV), after a treatment break forced by toxicity. Anecdotally, patients are showing great responses, highlighting a key area for prospective data generation.

When sequencing antibody-drug conjugates, clinical experience suggests that resistance to the chemotherapy payload is a primary driver of failure. Therefore, oncologists tend to avoid using another ADC with the same payload consecutively, preferring to switch both target and payload if possible.

To mitigate the severe toxicity of promising pan-RAS inhibitors, companies are adopting antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) technology. This marks a strategic expansion for ADCs, moving beyond traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy payloads to delivering highly specific targeted therapies, aiming to improve the therapeutic window of potent new drug classes.

With highly active agents yielding 30% complete response rates, the immediate goal should be to cure more patients by exploring potent combinations upfront. While sequencing minimizes toxicity, an ambitious combination strategy, such as ADC doublets, offers the best chance to eradicate disease and should be prioritized in clinical trials.

The primary reason Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs) stop working is payload resistance, a shift from the traditional belief that failure stems from tumors losing the target antigen. This insight drives development of multi-payload ADCs to overcome this resistance mechanism.

Experts question the efficacy of sequencing ADCs like EV (Nectin-4 target) and DV (HER2 target) because they share the same MMAE chemo payload. Since resistance is often tied to the payload, not the target antibody, switching targets may not overcome resistance, though anecdotal responses have been observed.

When planning treatment for patients who will receive multiple antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), the prevailing clinical strategy is to focus on alternating the drug's payload (e.g., a tubulin inhibitor vs. a topoisomerase I inhibitor). This approach is believed to be more effective at overcoming resistance than alternating the cell-surface target.

Rather than moving through distinct lines of therapy, a future strategy could involve an "ADC switch." When a patient progresses on an ADC-IO combination, the IO backbone would remain while the ADC is swapped for one with a different, non-cross-resistant mechanism, adapting the treatment in real-time.

Emerging data shows that a second ADC, particularly one with the same payload, often has limited efficacy. This suggests clinicians must be highly strategic in selecting the first ADC, as it may be their most impactful opportunity for this class of drugs.