Randomized, open-label phase 2 study comparing frontline dovitinib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

UNLABELLED: Angiogenesis inhibition by the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) inhibitor sorafenib provides survival benefit in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, angiogenic escape from sorafenib may occur due to angiogenesis-associated fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway activation. In addition to VEGFR and PDGFR, dovitinib inhibits FGFR. Frontline oral dovitinib (500 mg/day, 5 days on, 2 days off; n = 82) versus sorafenib (400 mg twice daily; n = 83) was evaluated in an open-label, randomized phase 2 study of Asian-Pacific patients with advanced HCC. The primary and key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and time to tumor progression (TTP) as determined by a local investigator, respectively. Patients included in the study were ineligible for surgical and/or locoregional therapies or had disease progression after receiving these therapies. The median OS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 8.0 (6.6-9.1) months for dovitinib and 8.4 (5.4-11.3) months for sorafenib. The median TTP (95% CI) per investigator assessment was 4.1 (2.8-4.2) months and 4.1 (2.8-4.3) months for dovitinib and sorafenib, respectively. Common any-cause adverse events included diarrhea (62%), decreased appetite (43%), nausea (41%), vomiting (41%), fatigue (35%), rash (34%), and pyrexia (30%) for dovitinib and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (66%) and decreased appetite (31%) for sorafenib. Subgroup analysis revealed a significantly higher median OS for patients in the dovitinib arm who had baseline plasma soluble VEGFR1 (sVEGFR1) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) below median levels versus at or above the median levels (median OS [95% CI]: sVEGFR1, 11.2 [9.0-13.8] and 5.7 [4.3-7.0] months, respectively [P = .0002]; HGF, 11.2 [8.9-13.8] and 5.9 [5.0-7.6] months, respectively [P = 0.0002]). CONCLUSION: Dovitinib was well tolerated, but activity was not greater than sorafenib as a frontline systemic therapy for HCC. Based on these data, no subsequent phase 3 study has been planned. (Hepatology 2016;64:774-784).

WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR LUNG CANCER TREATMENT: PATIENT VERSUS GENERAL PUBLIC VALUES.

OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer has been the most common cancer since 1985, accounting for 12-13 percent of cancer cases worldwide. Newer targeted therapies with potential increased survival benefits may not be affordable to patients. Many countries use arbitrary thresholds to determine whether a medical intervention is cost-effective. As such, many effective, albeit expensive, therapies are not being reimbursed. To understand the value placed on effective therapies, this study evaluates the patient and public willingness to pay (WTP) for a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for lung cancer treatments using Thailand as an example. METHODS: A total of 300 subjects responded to hypothetical lung cancer health states, described by three levels of severity and two levels of side effects, and provided their valuation of the level of quality of life and their WTP to improve from one state to another. RESULTS: The patients with the lowest income and general public were willing to pay more than twice the threshold for acceptability in Thailand (US Dollar 5,123/QALY [Thai Baht 160,000/QALY]). This increased significantly by wealth category. Patients' WTP was associated with quality of life, financial difficulties, health insurance, diarrhea, and wealth. CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights the value patients and general public place on effective lung cancer therapies.

Intercalated combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib for patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (FASTACT-2): a randomised, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779. FINDINGS: From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively). INTERPRETATION: Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Previous, uncontrolled studies have suggested that first-line treatment with gefitinib would be efficacious in selected patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label study, we randomly assigned previously untreated patients in East Asia who had advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma and who were nonsmokers or former light smokers to receive gefitinib (250 mg per day) (609 patients) or carboplatin (at a dose calculated to produce an area under the curve of 5 or 6 mg per milliliter per minute) plus paclitaxel (200 mg per square meter of body-surface area) (608 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: The 12-month rates of progression-free survival were 24.9% with gefitinib and 6.7% with carboplatin-paclitaxel. The study met its primary objective of showing the noninferiority of gefitinib and also showed its superiority, as compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel, with respect to progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). In the subgroup of 261 patients who were positive for the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received gefitinib than among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.64; P<0.001), whereas in the subgroup of 176 patients who were negative for the mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death with gefitinib, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.05 to 3.98; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were rash or acne (in 66.2% of patients) and diarrhea (46.6%) in the gefitinib group and neurotoxic effects (69.9%), neutropenia (67.1%), and alopecia (58.4%) in the carboplatin-paclitaxel group. CONCLUSIONS: Gefitinib is superior to carboplatin-paclitaxel as an initial treatment for pulmonary adenocarcinoma among nonsmokers or former light smokers in East Asia. The presence in the tumor of a mutation of the EGFR gene is a strong predictor of a better outcome with gefitinib. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00322452.)

Lung cancer working group report.

Asia needs a guideline for non-small-cell lung cancer because of differences in medical care, medical care insurance, ethnic variation and drug approval lag within Asian countries and compared with Western countries. Due to ethnic differences, drug dosages are often higher in the USA than in Japan. EGFR mutation in non-small-cell lung cancer was detected in 32% of Asians but only 6% of non-Asians, while differences in irinotecan metabolism cause higher frequencies of toxicity (leukopenia, diarrhea) in Asians. Pharmacodynamic ethnic differences in relation to paclitaxel/carboplatin resulted in longer median survival and a higher 1-year survival rate for Japanese-advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients compared with Americans. To solve the problem of drug lag, pharmaceutical companies must perform multinational Asian clinical trials with quick accrual of patients, while regulatory authorities must establish high-quality, efficient approval processes, and achieve regulatory harmonization. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network promotes creation of national clinical practice guidelines, and Korea, China and Thailand adapted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Many Asian countries still lack such guidelines, and there are no pan-Asian guidelines for non-small-cell lung cancer. Japan developed its own non-small-cell lung cancer guidelines and also a gefitinib guidance. The study group members concluded that immediate establishment of an Asian non-small-cell lung cancer guideline will be difficult because of the differences among the countries. Asian collaborative trials on treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer need to be started at an early date to generate Asian data.

Cost-Utility Analysis of First-Line Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Thailand.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of first-line chemotherapy regimens for non-small cell lung cancer patients in Thailand. METHODS: A Markov model comprising 3 health states (progression-free survival, progression, death) was used to estimate the long-term costs and health outcomes under a societal perspective with a lifetime horizon. Intervention was the combination of pemetrexed and cisplatin, AND the comparators were gemcitabine plus cisplatin and carboplatin plus paclitaxel. The efficacy and toxicity were obtained from landmark clinical trials, and the costs were based on a local Thai database. All costs and outcomes were discounted at 3%. The findings were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in both Thai baht (THB) and USD per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of sensitivity analyses, including 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, were performed. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was generated with a threshold of 160 000 THB/QALY or 4987 USD/QALY. RESULTS: Under the base-case analysis, pemetrexed plus cisplatin had the greatest total cost among 3 regimens, yielding an ICER of 64 369.97 USD/QALY (2 064 989 THB/QALY) compared with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, and ICER of 8649.16 USD/QALY (277 465 THB/QALY) compared with carboplatin plus paclitaxel. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis results indicated that at the local Thai threshold, gemcitabine plus cisplatin was likely to be the most cost-effective regimen. CONCLUSIONS: At the current price of pemetrexed, the combination of pemetrexed plus cisplatin was not found to be a cost-effective first-line regimen for patients with non-small cell lung cancer at the local Thai threshold compared with the gemcitabine plus cisplatin and carboplatin plus paclitaxel regimens.

Cancer medicines in Asia and Asia-Pacific: What is available, and is it effective enough?

This review article is an overview of the session at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Asia 2018 Congress entitled: 'Cancer medicines in Asia and Asia-Pacific: What is available, and is it effective enough?'. The article provides an overview of the session speakers' views on the impact that the lack of accessibility and availability of medicines has on patient outcomes in the treatment of breast cancer, colorectal cancer and lung cancer, responsible for more than one-third of cancer deaths in the Asian region. It also lists the various global policy initiatives that ESMO supports to promote the best cancer care in the Asian and Asia-Pacific region. The review presents extrapolated data from the 'ESMO International Consortium Study on the availability, out-of-pocket costs and accessibility of antineoplastic medicines in countries outside of Europe', which reveals several disparities among Asian countries, across the different income levels. In low- and middle-income countries, some barriers to the accessibility of anticancer medicines include the lack of government reimbursement, budget allocation for healthcare and quality-assured generic and biosimilar medicines, as well as shortages and patent rights. Throughout the article, the session presenters provide their views on strategies that can be considered to overcome these barriers.

Afatinib in locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC harboring common EGFR mutations, after chemotherapy: a Phase IV study.

AIM: The current study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of second-line afatinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following chemotherapy. PATIENTS & METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm Phase IV study, patients with EGFRm+ (Del19/L858R) NSCLC who had progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy received afatinib (starting dose 40 mg/day). The primary end point was confirmed objective response. RESULTS: 60 patients received afatinib for a median duration of 11.5 months. 50% of patients had a confirmed objective response, of median duration 13.8 months. Median progression-free survival was 10.9 months. The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (72%), rash (28%) and paronychia (23%). CONCLUSION: Our data support the use of afatinib (40 mg/day) as an effective and well-tolerated second-line treatment in EGFRm+ NSCLC.

Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to determine whether the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor erlotinib prolongs survival in non-small-cell lung cancer after the failure of first-line or second-line chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer, with performance status from 0 to 3, were eligible if they had received one or two prior chemotherapy regimens. The patients were stratified according to center, performance status, response to prior chemotherapy, number of prior regimens, and prior platinum-based therapy and were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral erlotinib, at a dose of 150 mg daily, or placebo. RESULTS: The median age of the 731 patients who underwent randomization was 61.4 years; 49 percent had received two prior chemotherapy regimens, and 93 percent had received platinum-based chemotherapy. The response rate was 8.9 percent in the erlotinib group and less than 1 percent in the placebo group (P<0.001); the median duration of the response was 7.9 months and 3.7 months, respectively. Progression-free survival was 2.2 months and 1.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61, adjusted for stratification categories; P<0.001). Overall survival was 6.7 months and 4.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.70; P<0.001), in favor of erlotinib. Five percent of patients discontinued erlotinib because of toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: Erlotinib can prolong survival in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer after first-line or second-line chemotherapy.

Experience with gemcitabine and cisplatin in the therapy of inoperable and metastatic cholangiocarcinoma.

AIM: To study the activity of gemcitabine and cisplatin in a cohort of patients with inoperable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with pathologically proven cholangiocarcinoma, receiving treatment that consisted of gemcitabine at 1250 mg/m(2) in a 30-min infusion on d 1 and 8, and cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) at every 21-d cycle, were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: From June 2003 to December 2005, 42 patients were evaluated. Twelve patients (28%) had unresectable disease and 30 (72%) had metastatic disease. There were 28 males and 14 females with a median age of 51 years (range 33-67) and median ECOG PS of 1 (range 0-2). A total of 171 cycles were given with a median number of cycles of 4 (range 1-6). There were 0 CR, 9 PR, 11 SD and 13 PD (response rate 21%). Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities were: anemia in 33%, neutropenia in 22% and thrombocytopenia in 5%. Non-hematologic toxicity was generally mild. No cases of febrile neutropenia or treatment-related death were noted. The median survival was 10.8 mo (range 8.4-13 mo) and progression free survival was 8.5 mo. One-year survival rate was 40%. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin had consistent efficacy in patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Phase II study of cisplatin combined to irinotecan administered alternatingly with docetaxel in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the activity and toxicity of cisplatin and irinotecan alternating with docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHOD: Eligibility included chemo-naïve stage IIIB with malignant effusion and stage IV NSCLC patients with measurable disease and a good performance status. Twenty-four patients were enrolled into the present study. There were 19 males and 5 females with a median age of 58.5 years and the median performance status was 1. Ninety-six percent had stage IV disease. These patients received cisplatin at 80 mg/ m2 and irinotecan at 200 mg/m2 on day 1, followed by docetaxel at 75 mg/m2 on day 22, in 6-week cycle for a maximum of 3 cycles. RESULTS: Eight out of twenty-two evaluable patients obtained a partial response (36%). The median time to tumor progression was 6 months. The median survival time and 1-year survival rate were 10.4 months and 45% respectively. The most frequent severe toxicities were neutropenia, anemia, and diarrhea. Febrile neutropenia occurred in four patients (16%), and was the cause of treatment-related deaths in two (8%). Other nonhematologic toxicities were mild including nausea, vomiting, and skin rash. CONCLUSION: Alternating cisplatin and irinotecan with docetaxel, as used in the present study was feasible and demonstrated encouraging efficacy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer However, this approach appears to be more toxic, especially in myelosuppression, than in previous reports of the sequential use of the similar agents.

Phase II study of 24-hour infusion of paclitaxel (Intaxel) with carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the activity and toxicity of combined 24-hour infusion of paclitaxel with carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility required measurable disease; stage III B with malignant pleural effusion or stage IV disease, with a performance status (PS) of ECOG 0-2. Chemotherapy consisted of 24 hours continuous infusion of paclitaxel at 135 mg/m(2) on day 1, followed by carboplatin (AUC=6) on day 2. Treatment was repeated at 3-week intervals for a total of 6 cycles. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled. Twenty six patients were male and 13 female, with a median age of 57 years (range, 38 to 72). Six patients (15%) had stage III B and 33 (85%) had stage IV. PS 0-1/2 was 67%/33%. A total of 131 cycles was administered and the median number of cycles was 4 (range, 2-6). Grade 3-4 neutropenia, grade 3-4 leukopenia and grade 3 anemia occurred in 3%, 3% and 23%, respectively. One patient (3%) developed febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 diarrhea occurred in 3 patients (8%). Other non-hematologic toxicities were mild including mucositis and skin rash. The overall response rate was 15%. Median survival was 8 months (range 6-9.5 months) and 1-year survival rate was 20%. CONCLUSIONS: The combined 24-hour infusion of paclitaxel (Intaxel) with carboplatin is a feasible and well-tolerated regimen in the treatment of advanced NSCLC patients.

Crizotinib treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients: a budget impact analysis based in Thailand.

OBJECTIVE: With the advent of the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, treatment of ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has become more effective while drug costs are still a major concern. This study aimed to estimate the budget impact of crizotinib versus other standard therapies in Thai advanced NSCLC patients with ALK rearrangement. METHODS: The budget impact model was developed to estimate the net budget impact of crizotinib compared with no crizotinib considering the payer's perspective over a three-year period. Costs included drugs, ALK testing by FISH, adverse event treatment, administration and monitoring, and best supportive care. Data on costs and population were from a database in Thailand. Costs were presented for the year 2015. A univariate sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the robustness of our findings. RESULTS: The total net budget impact of crizotinib in three years was 125,576,699 THB (3,480,507 USD), 91,156,049 THB (2,526,498 USD), and 42,724,760 THB (1,184,167 USD) respectively. When considering only patients receiving crizotinib, the expenditure increased by 41,199.70 THB (1141.90 USD), 20,755.02 THB (575.25 USD), and 8834.73 THB (244.87 USD) per patient per month. The main driven costs were from the cost of ALK testing and drugs. CONCLUSION: Despite its treatment value in ALK-positive patients, crizotinib can only be affordable for Thai patients within upper middle or high economic status. Availability for all patients under current payment models is limited.

Biomarker Testing for Personalized Therapy in Lung Cancer in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

There have been many important advances in personalized therapy for patients with lung cancer, particularly for those with advanced disease. Molecular testing is crucial for implementation of personalized therapy. Although the United States and many Western countries have come far in the implementation of personalized therapy for lung cancer, there are substantial challenges for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Globally, the LMICs display great heterogeneity in the pattern of implementation of molecular testing and targeted therapy. The current review presents an attempt to identify the challenges and obstacles for the implementation of molecular testing and the use of targeted therapies in these areas. Lack of infrastructure, lack of technical expertise, economic factors, and lack of access to new drugs are among the substantial barriers.

Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Necitumumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in East Asian Patients with Stage IV Squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized SQUIRE Study.

PURPOSE: The phase 3 randomized SQUIRE study revealed significantly longer overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (neci+GC) than for gemcitabine and cisplatin alone (GC) in 1,093 patients with previously untreated advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This post hoc subgroup analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of neci+GC among East Asian (EA) patients enrolled in the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients received up to six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine (days 1 and 8, 1,250 mg/m²) and cisplatin (day 1, 75 mg/m²). Patients in the neci+GC arm also received necitumumab (days 1 and 8, 800 mg) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from stratified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: In EA patients, there were improvements for neci+GC (n=43) versus GC (n=41) in OS (HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.484 to 1.341) and PFS (HR, 0.720; 95% CI, 0.439 to 1.180), consistent with the results for non-EA patients observed in the present study. The overall safety data were consistent between EA and non-EA patients. A numerically higher proportion of patients experienced serious adverse events (AEs), grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs with an outcome of death for neci+GC versus GC in EA patients and EA patients versus non-EA patients for neci+GC. CONCLUSION: Although limited by the small sample size and post hoc nature of the analysis, these findings are consistent with those of the overall study and suggest that neci+GC offers a survival advantage and favorable benefit/risk for EA patients with advanced squamous NSCLC.

Efficacy according to blind independent central review: Post-hoc analyses from the phase III, randomized, multicenter, IPASS study of first-line gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC.

OBJECTIVE: The Phase III, randomized, open-label IPASS study (NCT00322452) of first-line epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR TKI) gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel for Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) showed that investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were significantly prolonged in patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC who received gefitinib versus patients with EGFR mutation-negative NSCLC. We report post-hoc analyses of IPASS data by blind independent central review (BICR), performed at the request of the US FDA, in a subset of patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years; histologically/cytologically confirmed Stage IIB/IV adenocarcinoma NSCLC; non- or former light-smokers; treatment-naïve) were randomly assigned 1:1 to gefitinib (250mg/day) or carboplatin (dose calculated to produce an area under the curve of 5 or 6 mg/mL/minute)/paclitaxel (200mg/m2). Primary endpoint: PFS. BICR analyses included PFS, ORR, and duration of response (DoR). RESULTS: Scans from 186 IPASS patients (gefitinib n=88, carboplatin/paclitaxel n=98) with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC were available for BICR. Consistent with investigator-assessed results, in patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC: PFS (hazard ratio 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38, 0.79; p=0.0012) and ORR (odds ratio 3.00; 95% CI 1.63, 5.54; p=0.0004) were significantly longer with gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel. The median DoR by BICR was 9.6 months with gefitinib and 5.5 months with carboplatin/paclitaxel. CONCLUSION: BICR analysis of IPASS data support the original, investigator-assessed results. EGFR mutation-positive status remains a significant predictor of response to first-line TKI therapy.

Gefitinib or Erlotinib vs Chemotherapy for EGFR Mutation-Positive Lung Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Overall Survival.

Background: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to examine the impact of first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy on overall survival (OS) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Data from trials comparing EGFR-TKI against chemotherapy in exon 19 deletion (del19) or exon 21 L858R (L858R) EGFR mutations patients were used. We performed Cox regression to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Impact of postprogression therapies was examined in exploratory analyses. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Six eligible trials (gefitinib = 3, erlotinib = 3) included 1231 patients; 632 received EGFR-TKI and 599 received chemotherapy. At a median 35.0 months follow-up, there were 780 deaths and 1004 progressions. There was no difference in OS between EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy (HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.17, P = .84). There was also no difference in OS for Del19 (n = 682, HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.16, P = .68) and L858R (n = 540, HR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.32, P = .59) subgroups ( P interaction = .47), or according to smoking status, sex, performance status, age, ethnicity, or histology. However, EGFR-TKI statistically significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) overall (HR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.32 to 0.42, P < .001) and in all subgroups. Following progression, 73.8% from the chemotherapy arm received EGFR-TKI, and 65.9% from the EGFR-TKI arm received chemotherapy. Nine percent from the EGFR-TKI arm received no further treatment vs 0.6% from the chemotherapy arm. Following disease progression, patients randomly assigned to EGFR-TKI had shorter OS than those randomly assigned to chemotherapy (12.8 months, 95% CI = 11.4 to 14.3, vs 19.8 months, 95% CI = 17.6 to 21.7). Conclusions: Despite statistically significant PFS benefit, there is no relative OS advantage with frontline gefitinib or erlotinib vs chemotherapy in EGFR -mutated NSCLC. This finding is likely due to the high rate of crossover at progression.

Gefitinib plus best supportive care in previously treated patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (Iressa Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer).

BACKGROUND: This placebo-controlled phase III study investigated the effect on survival of gefitinib as second-line or third-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: 1692 patients who were refractory to or intolerant of their latest chemotherapy regimen were randomly assigned in a ratio of two to one either gefitinib (250 mg/day) or placebo, plus best supportive care. The primary endpoint was survival in the overall population of patients and those with adenocarcinoma. The primary analysis of the population for survival was by intention to treat. This study has been submitted for registration with ClinicalTrials.gov, number 1839IL/709. FINDINGS: 1129 patients were assigned gefitinib and 563 placebo. At median follow-up of 7.2 months, median survival did not differ significantly between the groups in the overall population (5.6 months for gefitinib and 5.1 months for placebo; hazard ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.77-1.02], p=0.087) or among the 812 patients with adenocarcinoma (6.3 months vs 5.4 months; 0.84 [0.68-1.03], p=0.089). Preplanned subgroup analyses showed significantly longer survival in the gefitinib group than the placebo group for never-smokers (n=375; 0.67 [0.49-0.92], p=0.012; median survival 8.9 vs 6.1 months) and patients of Asian origin (n=342; 0.66 [0.48-0.91], p=0.01; median survival 9.5 vs 5.5 months). Gefitinib was well tolerated, as in previous studies. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with gefitinib was not associated with significant improvement in survival in either coprimary population. There was pronounced heterogeneity in survival outcomes between groups of patients, with some evidence of benefit among never-smokers and patients of Asian origin.

A phase II study of docetaxel and carboplatin in Thai patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This phase II study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the docetaxel plus carboplatin combination in chemotherapy-naive Thai patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHOD: Forty patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1, stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were enrolled in a phase H study between August 2001 and April 2003. Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and Carboplatin AUC = 6 were given every 3 weeks. Response to treatment and toxicity were graded using standard WHO criteria. The Thai Functional Living Index Cancer (T-FLIC) scale was used to assess the Quality of Life (QoL) of all treated patients. RESULTS: Forty patients (median age: 55 years, range, 39-68 years; PS:0-1) were enrolled: one had stage IIIB disease with effusion, while thirty-nine had stage IV disease. Five patients were non-evaluable due to death within the first cycle; two dying of febrile neutropenia and sepsis, two of pulmonary infection, and one of unknown etiology. Partial response (PR) was seen in 28.6% patients, stable disease (SD) in 25.7%, and progressive disease (PD) in 45.7%. The median survival time was 32 weeks and the 1-year survival rate was 30.7%. Body mass index (BMI) was the only factor associated with survival time (univariate analysis: p = 0.006; multivariate analysis: p = 0.004). Other factors (gender, age, histology, ECOG PS, and glomerular filtration rate) were not predict for survival. The major treatment-related toxicities were neutropenia (from 152 treatment cycles there were grade 4: 19.7%; grade 3: 23.7%), febrile neutropenia (from 152 treatment cycles there was 3.95%), and diarrhea (grades 3/4: 0.66%). The QoL scores improved significantly throughout the treatment period. CONCLUSION: The regimen of docetaxel and carboplatin is active in advanced NSCLC and may be considered for first-line therapy.

Pathway Targeted Immunotherapy: Rationale and Evidence of Durable Clinical Responses with a Novel, EGF-directed Agent for Advanced NSCLC.

Abnormalities in the epidermal growth factor (EGF) and EGFR pathway promote progression of NSCLC. Immunization with EGF vaccine induces specific, neutralizing anti-EGF antibodies that prevent binding of the ligand to its receptor. This concept of pathway targeted immunotherapy (PTI) was validated in vitro by dose-related suppression of EGFR, Akt, and Erk1/2 phosphorylation in cell lines with different mutations. A randomized phase II trial showed improved overall survival (OS) in subgroups with advanced NSCLC showing a clear immunologic response. By per-protocol analysis of the ensuing phase IIb trial, patients receiving EGF PTI survived 3 months longer than controls (12.43 versus 9.43 months; hazard ratio = 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.98]). These data were confirmed in a larger trial showing an OS benefit over control of >3 months. The variable most strongly correlated with efficacy was circulating EGF at enrolment. Patients with serum EGF levels >250 pg/mL benefited most from treatment with EGF PTI. Of 188 patients tested, 94 were above this biomarker threshold. The OS benefit from active versus control treatment was 6.7 months. More than 15% of patients had responses for >5 years. Long-term survivors are seen in all EGF PTI trials. Treatment is well-tolerated, induces high anti-EGF antibody titers, reduces levels of circulating serum EGF, achieves durable responses, and significantly prolongs OS. A threshold of 250 pg/mL has been set to enrich the study population in the ongoing pivotal trial. This biomarker-guided study in an enriched population of patients with both squamous and nonsquamous stage IV NSCLC aims to replicate the favorable efficacy/tolerability balance of earlier studies.