Slide 1: TTFields Therapy With Standard of Care in mNSCLC After Platinum-Based Therapies: Phase 3 LUNAR Study
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy With Standard of Care (SOC) in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (mNSCLC) After Platinum-Based Therapies: Randomized, Phase 3 LUNAR Study Ticiana Leal', Rupesh Kotecha?, Rodryg Ramlau?, Li Zhang* Janusz Milanowski, Manuel Cobo®, Jaromir Roubec’, Lubos Pet
Slide 2: Background
Background e Metastatic NSCLC remains largely incurable Platinum-based chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICls) are standard first ine therapy for metastatic NSCLC lacking actionable driver mutations!-3 e Unfortunately, most patients develop disease progression*~’ and 5-year survival is
Slide 3: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Mechanism of Action
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Mechanism of Action 7 Dividing cancer cells TTFields AVAy |. <2 Disruption of mitosis aa “\ Aneuploidy (@ @)— e TTFields are electric fields that exert physical forces on electrically charged components in dividing cancer cells, leading to an antimitotic effect! Calr
Slide 4: Preclinical Evidence
Preclinical Evidence TTFields application together with ICls or taxanes demonstrated efficacy in preclinical NSCLC models!-3 In Vitro Model* In Vivo Model? 150 4 3007 . ee 2 T 1 5 a _ + 3 100 @— € 200 x . = * x | 5; _ ——o 2B lz 2 3 es o $ +L PIX+ 5 me % 504 TTFields 2 100+ 9 ~ e £ % g & 0 po at 0 0.
Slide 5: TTFields Therapy
TTFields Therapy « Non-invasive anticancer treatment modality TTFields device Array Placement e Delivered locoregionally to the chest by a wearable medical device and two pairs of arrays (adhesive bandages with biocompatible insulated ceramic discs covered by hydrogel) Delivered to the patient's hom
Slide 6: LUNAR Phase 3 Study Design
LUNAR Phase 3 Study Design Objective: To evaluate safety and efficacy of TTFields therapy with standard of care (SOC) compared to SOC alone in metastatic NSCLC progressing on or after platinum-based therapy TTFields therapy* and SOC stigator’s chi 3 post- progression follow-up visits Key eligibility
Slide 7: LUNAR Study Endpoints and Statistical Analysis
LUNAR Study Endpoints and Statistical Analysis * OS with TTFields + SOC * OS in ICl-treated subgroup * PFS vs SOC alone * OS in docetaxel-treated subgroup * ORR + PFS/OS by histology * QoL (EORTC QLQ C30/LC13) * Safety Statistical Analysis * Targeted hazard ratio < 0.75 using two-sided proportional
Slide 8: Baseline Demographics and Characteristics
Baseline Demographics and Characteristics Age, yr — median (range) 63 (36-85) 65 (22-86) 64 (22-86) Sex, male 66% 63% 65% Race White 81% 80% 80% Asian 12% 9% 10% Black or African American 2% 2% 2% Other/unknown 5% 8% 6% . . . Region Baseline demographics were similar North America 30% 31% 30% across
Slide 9: Baseline Disease Characteristics
Baseline Disease Characteristics Histology Non-squamous/squamous 58%/42% 55%/45% 56%/44% PD-L1 <1% 17% 17% 17% 1-49% 27% 29% 28% + Available PD-L1 data showed no 2 50% is 5 ies differences between arms Unknown* 49% 42% 45% Prior lines of systemic therapy** 1 89% 89% 89% 2+ 11% 10% 11% Prior ICI 31%
Slide 10: Overall Survival in the ITT Population
Overall Survival in the ITT Population 1.0 0.9 0.8 Median OS (95% Cl), months 13.2 (10.3-15.5) she) (8.1-11.5) 07 1-year survival (95% Cl) 53% (44-61) 42% (34-50) 0.6 3-year survival (95: % Cl) 18% (11-27) 7% (2-15) Probability of Overall Survival 0.5 HR (95% Cl): 0.74 (0.56—-0.98) 04 P=0.035 0.3 02
Slide 11: Overall Survival in ICI-Treated Patients
Overall Survival in |Cl- Treated Patients 1.0 08 Median OS (95% Cl), months nOee son Ges 07 1-year survival (95% Cl) 60% (47-71) 46% (33-57) 0.6 3-year survival (95% Cl) 27% (15-42) 9% (3-21) We HR (95% Cl): 0.63 (0.41-0.96) 04 P=0.03 03 TTFields + ICI Probability of Overall Survival 0.2 01 0 0 6 12
Slide 12: Overall Survival in DTX-Treated Patients
Overall Survival in DTX-Treated Patients 0.9 f 5 a1t. 87 08 Median OS (95% Cl), months (82-1411) (63-113) 07 1-year survival (95% Cl) 46% (33-57) 38% (27-49) 0.6 3-year survival (95% Cl) 9% (3-20) 5% (0-18) oe HR (95% Cl): 0.81 (0.55-1.19) 04 P=0.28 0.3 Probability of Overall Survival 0.2 TTFields +
Slide 13: Overall Survival by Histology Subgroups
Overall Survival by Histology Subgroups Non-Squamous Squamous Median OS (95% Cl), months 12.6 (8.8-19.8) 9.9 (6.9-16.4) Median OS (95% Cl), months 13.9 (9.7-17.1) 10.1 (8.3-14.3) 10 1.0 B09 HR (95% Cl): 0.80 (0.54-1.16) ig 08 HR (95% Cl): 0.67 (0.44-1.01) 2 08 P= 0.28 z 08 P= 0.05 B o7 207 3S ro § 0
Slide 14: Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population
Progression-Free Survival in the ITT Population 1.0 0.9 ee) ec i eS 48 41 08 Median PFS (95% Cl), months (41-57) (31-46) 07 HR (95% Cl): 0.85 (0.67-1.11) os P= 0.23 05 04 0.3 TTFields + SOC Probability of Progression-Free Survival 0.2 O14 ie} ie} 6 12 18 Numberatrisk: Follow-Up (Months) TTFields + S
Slide 15: Response Rates in the ITT Population
Response Rates in the ITT Population Patients with a follow-up scan n= 122 n=127 20% 17% ORR, % (95% Cl) teed) {He 2) * All5 complete responses occurred in , . as patients receiving an ICI Difference in ORR, % (95% Cl) (-8.5-15.0) P=105 —4 with TTFields therapy Best overall response, % —1 with ICI a
Slide 16: Safety and Tolerability
Safety and Tolerability Allgrades Grade>3 Allgrades Grade >3 Any AE* 97% 59% 91% 56% + Majority of patients (94%) had Most frequent AEs >1AE Dermatitis 43% 2% 2% 0% Fatigue 28% 4% 37% 8% * Comparable incidence of grade Musculoskeletal pain 36% 3% 27% 4% > 3 AEs between arms Dyspnea 20% 7% 25% 3% ~ A
Slide 17: TTFields Adverse Device Effects (ADEs)
TTFields Adverse Device Effects (ADEs) Prefered erm See Any ADE* 73.1% 69.7% ADEs Grade > 3 45% 7.6% Dermatitis 1.5% 3.0% Pruritus ie) 15% * A 7 eenaicer a age Median device usage was 15 weeks Pain 15% 0% with ICI; 13 weeks with DTX Skin infection 0 15% ‘ Bronchopleural fistula 15% 0% » Most device-
Slide 18: Conclusions
Conclusions « Pivotal, phase 3 LUNAR study met its primary endpoint « TTFields therapy with SOC provided a statistically significant and clinically meaningful 3-month improvement in median OS vs SOC (HR: 0.74, P = 0.035) with no added systemic toxicities — Statistically significant ~8-month increase
Slide 19: Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements Special thank you to all participating patients, their families, and clinical research teams for your commitment and contributions Thank you to all participating sites around the world: Austria: Medical University Salzburg; Belgium: Institut Jules Bordet, Hospital AZ Sint Maarten; C
Slide 20: an) LINAS novecure'|medicalaffairs
an) LINAS novecure'|medicalaffairs
Slide 21: Baseline Demographics and Characteristics
Baseline Demographics and Characteristics Baseline demographics were similar across all subgroups Age, yr — median (range) 63 (36-85) 65 (22-86) 64 (36-85) 65 (23-86) 63 (43-81) 65 (22-81) Sex, male 66% 63% 67% 66% 66% 59% Race White 81% 80% 82% 78% 80% 82% Asian 12% 9% 11% Th 13% 10% Black or Afric
Slide 22: Baseline Disease Characteristics
Baseline Disease Characteristics Histology Non-squamous/squamous 58%/42% 55%/45% 56%/44% 54%/46% 59%/41% 56%/44% PD-L1 <1% 17% 17% 18% 24% 16% 10% 1-49% 27% 29% 26% 27% 28% 31% 250% 7h 13% 8% 12% 7h 14% Unknown* 49% 42% 49% 38% 49% 45% Prior lines of systemic therapy** A 89% 89% 97% 94% 82% 85% 2+ 1
Slide 23: TTFields Therapy in the Clinic and Daily Life
TTFields Therapy in the Clinic and Daily Life « The patient is prescribed TTFields therapy by the treating oncologist TTFields Therapy in Daily Life » Novocure team generates a recommended personalized array layout based on disease burden and torso size to maximize field intensity at the tumor locat