Biomarker subset analysis of a phase IIIb, open-label study of afatinib in EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-naive patients with EGFRm+ non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: To explore the relationship between mutations in cfDNA and response to afatinib. Patients & methods: In total, 64 patients from one Chinese site with locally advanced/metastatic EGFRm+ non-small-cell lung cancer, who received afatinib 40 mg once daily, were included. Results: Overall, 33 (82.5%) patients became EGFRm- by visit 3; median progression-free survival was longer in these patients vs those who did not (11.0 vs 5.5 months). Progression-free survival was shorter in 42 (45.2%) patients with non-EGFR co-mutations at baseline vs those without (8.1 vs 12.5 months). Neither difference was significant. Conclusion: Afatinib provided clinical benefit for patients with EGFRm+ non-small-cell lung cancer across all subgroups. EGFRm status assessment in plasma cfDNA is a useful method of monitoring treatment.

We conducted a study in 64 Chinese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer to investigate the relationship between cancer mutations detected in the blood and the response to treatment with afatinib, which is known to be effective against EGFR mutations. Technology is now available to detect these mutations in the blood, as an alternative to obtaining and testing lung tissue samples. All 64 patients had EGFR mutations (and some patients had additional types of mutations) when afatinib was started (visit 1 in the study). By visit 3, most patients (82.5%) no longer had EGFR mutations detected in their blood, and these patients responded better to afatinib than those who still had EGFR mutations in their blood. Patients with additional types of mutations generally did not respond as well as those who had only EGFR mutations. Although results showed clinical benefit with afatinib using assessment of mutation status in the blood, statistical significance could not be shown due to the small size of the study. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01953913 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

A Phase IIIb Open-Label, Single-Arm Study of Afatinib in EGFR TKI-Naïve Patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC: Final Analysis, with a Focus on Patients Enrolled at Sites in China.

BACKGROUND: Afatinib has been shown as a suitable option for the treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in randomized controlled trials. However, patients treated in real-world clinical practice, including elderly patients, and those with brain metastases or poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance statuses, are often excluded from these studies. OBJECTIVE: To report the final results, with a particular focus on patients enrolled in China, from a prospective phase IIIb, "near real-world" study of afatinib in tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naïve Asian patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NCT01953913 was conducted at 34 centers across Asia. Entry criteria were broad to reflect real-world settings. Patients received afatinib 40 mg/day until tumor progression, lack of clinical benefit, or poor tolerability. Assessments included safety, time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: 541 patients were treated, of whom 412 were enrolled in China. Dose reductions were implemented in 28.7% of patients overall, and 17.7% of patients from China. Safety findings were consistent with phase III studies of afatinib. Median TTSP in all patients was 14.0 months (95% CI 12.9-15.9), and median PFS was 12.1 months (95% CI 11.0-13.6). Median TTSP (13.8 months, 95% CI 12.7-16.1) and PFS (11.4 months, 95% CI 10.9-13.7) were similar in patients from China to the overall population. Among patients from China who had dose reductions, TTSP was numerically longer than in those who did not (16.4 vs. 13.8 months; P = 0.0703), while PFS was significantly longer (13.9 vs. 11.1 months; P = 0.0275). Among patients from China with brain metastases, TTSP was numerically shorter than in those without (11.0 vs. 14.4 months; P = 0.0869), whereas PFS was significantly shorter (9.2 vs. 12.9 months; P = 0.0075). CONCLUSIONS: Safety data for afatinib when used in a "near real-world" setting in patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC was consistent with the known safety profile of afatinib. Supporting efficacy data of afatinib were provided in all patients, and in those enrolled in China. Tolerability-guided afatinib dose reduction allowed patients to remain on treatment and continue to experience clinical benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: NCT01953913 (1 October 2013).

Phase 1b Open-Label Trial of Afatinib Plus Xentuzumab (BI 836845) in Patients With EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC After Progression on EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Insulin-like growth factor signaling has been implicated in acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in NSCLC. This phase 1 trial (NCT02191891) investigated the combination of xentuzumab (an insulin-like growth factor-ligand neutralizing monoclonal antibody) and afatinib (an EGFR TKI) in patients with previously treated EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. METHODS: The trial comprised dose escalation (part A) and expansion (part B). Patients had advanced or metastatic NSCLC that had progressed on EGFR TKI monotherapy or platinum-based chemotherapy (nonadenocarcinoma only, part A) or irreversible EGFR TKI monotherapy (part B). Absence of EGFR T790M mutation was required in part B. Part A used a 3 + 3 design, with a starting dose of xentuzumab 1000 mg/wk (intravenous) and afatinib 30 mg/d (oral). Primary endpoints were the maximum tolerated dose of the combination (part A) and objective response (part B). RESULTS: A total of 16 patients each were treated in parts A and B. Maximum tolerated dose was xentuzumab 1000 mg/wk plus afatinib 40 mg/d. No patients in part B had an objective response, but 10 had stable disease (median [range] duration of disease control: 2.3 [0.8-10.9] mo). The most common drug-related adverse events were diarrhea (75 %), paronychia (69 %), and rash (69 %) in part A and diarrhea (31 %), rash (19 %), paronychia (19 %), and fatigue (19 %) in part B. CONCLUSIONS: There were no new safety issues; xentuzumab and afatinib could be safely coadministered. Nevertheless, the combination revealed only modest activity in patients with EGFR mutation-positive, T790M-negative NSCLC after progression on afatinib.

Afatinib in EGFR TKI-Naïve Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Three Phase IIIb Studies.

BACKGROUND: Afatinib is approved for first-line treatment of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we report findings from a combined analysis of three phase IIIb studies of afatinib in EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naïve patients. METHODS: EGFR-TKI-naïve patients with EGFRm+ NSCLC received afatinib 40 mg/day. Dose reductions were permitted for adverse events (AEs). Efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), and tumor response. Subgroup analyses were performed by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), presence of brain metastasis, age and common/uncommon EGFR mutations (plus other factors). RESULTS: 1108 patients were treated. Median age was 61 years (range, 25-89); 19.2% had baseline brain metastases, 4.4% had ECOG PS ≥2, and 17.9% had tumors harboring uncommon mutations. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in 97.2%, most commonly diarrhea and rash. 41.6% had AEs leading to dose reduction. Median PFS was 13.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 12.0-13.8]; median TTSP was 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.9-16.1). Objective response rate (ORR) was 55.0%. Age, presence of baseline brain metastases, major (G719X, L861Q, S768I) or compound uncommon mutations had little/no effect on PFS, TTSP, or ORR, while outcomes were poorer in patients with ECOG PS 2 or exon 20 insertion/T790M mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Afatinib was tolerable with no new safety signals. Afatinib demonstrated encouraging efficacy in a broad patient population, including those with brain metastases or uncommon EGFR mutations.

A phase Ib/II study of xentuzumab, an IGF-neutralising antibody, combined with exemestane and everolimus in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Xentuzumab-a humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody-binds IGF-1 and IGF-2, inhibiting their growth-promoting signalling and suppressing AKT activation by everolimus. This phase Ib/II exploratory trial evaluated xentuzumab plus everolimus and exemestane in hormone receptor-positive, locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC). METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative LA/MBC resistant to non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors were enrolled. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane were determined in phase I (single-arm, dose-escalation). In phase II (open-label), patients were randomised 1:1 to the RP2D of xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane or everolimus/exemestane alone. Randomisation was stratified by the presence of visceral metastases. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: MTD was determined as xentuzumab 1000 mg weekly plus everolimus 10 mg/day and exemestane 25 mg/day. A total of 140 patients were enrolled in phase II (70 to each arm). Further recruitment was stopped following an unfavourable benefit-risk assessment by the internal Data Monitoring Committee appointed by the sponsor. Xentuzumab was discontinued; patients could receive everolimus/exemestane if clinically indicated. Median PFS was 7.3 months (95% CI 3.3-not calculable) in the xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane group and 5.6 months (3.7-9.1) in the everolimus/exemestane group (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.57-1.65; P = 0.9057). In a pre-specified subgroup of patients without visceral metastases at screening, xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane showed evidence of PFS benefit versus everolimus/exemestane (hazard ratio 0.21 [0.05-0.98]; P = 0.0293). Most common any-cause adverse events in phase II were diarrhoea (29 [41.4%] in the xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane group versus 20 [29.0%] in the everolimus/exemestane group), mucosal inflammation (27 [38.6%] versus 21 [30.4%]), stomatitis (24 [34.3%] versus 24 [34.8%]), and asthenia (21 [30.0%] versus 24 [34.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of xentuzumab to everolimus/exemestane did not improve PFS in the overall population, leading to early discontinuation of the trial. Evidence of PFS benefit was observed in patients without visceral metastases when treated with xentuzumab/everolimus/exemestane, leading to initiation of the phase II XENERA™-1 trial (NCT03659136). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02123823 . Prospectively registered, 8 March 2013.

Afatinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer harboring HER2 mutations, previously treated with chemotherapy: A phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite 1-4 % of NSCLC tumors harboring mutations in the HER2 gene, there are no approved HER2-pathway-targeted treatments available. We report an open-label, single-arm, multicenter phase II study investigating the efficacy and safety of afatinib in Asian patients with HER2-mutation positive (HER2m+) NSCLC. METHODS: Eligible patients for Part A had confirmed stage IIIb/IV HER2m + NSCLC, had failed one or two prior lines of chemotherapy, and were EGFR/HER2-inhibitor naïve. Patients received oral afatinib 40 mg/day in continuous 28-day cycles, until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs). Patients qualified for Part B if they had > 12 weeks' clinical benefit and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2. In Part B, patients were to receive afatinib at the last received dose, plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly, until disease progression or intolerable AEs. The primary endpoint in Part A was objective response (OR); secondary endpoints included disease control (DC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Further exploratory endpoints were OR, DC, and PFS in Part B. RESULTS: Eighteen patients received afatinib in Part A. No patient achieved an OR; 11 patients (61.1 %) achieved stable disease, and six patients (33.3 %) had progressive disease. DC rate was therefore 61.1 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 35.7, 82.7). A decrease in tumor size from baseline of > 0 to < 30 % was observed in eight patients. At the time of analysis, 16 patients (88.9 %) had progressed or died. Median PFS was 2.76 months (95 % CI: 1.87, 4.60) and median OS was 10.02 months (95 % CI: 8.47, 10.08). All patients experienced ≥ 1 AE, most commonly diarrhea (66.7 %) and rash (33.3 %). No patients met the inclusion criteria for Part B, and recruitment was slow; therefore, the study was terminated. CONCLUSIONS: This study found no clinical benefit of afatinib for EGFR TKI-naïve patients with HER2m + NSCLC.

Two first-in-human studies of xentuzumab, a humanised insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-neutralising antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Xentuzumab, an insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1/IGF-2-neutralising antibody, binds IGF-1 and IGF-2, inhibiting their growth-promoting signalling. Two first-in-human trials assessed the maximum-tolerated/relevant biological dose (MTD/RBD), safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and activity of xentuzumab in advanced/metastatic solid cancers. METHODS: These phase 1, open-label trials comprised dose-finding (part I; 3 + 3 design) and expansion cohorts (part II; selected tumours; RBD [weekly dosing]). Primary endpoints were MTD/RBD. RESULTS: Study 1280.1 involved 61 patients (part I: xentuzumab 10-1800 mg weekly, n = 48; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 13); study 1280.2, 64 patients (part I: 10-3600 mg three-weekly, n = 33; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 31). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred; the MTD was not reached for either schedule. Adverse events were generally grade 1/2, mostly gastrointestinal. Xentuzumab showed dose-proportional pharmacokinetics. Total plasma IGF-1 increased dose dependently, plateauing at ~1000 mg/week; at ≥450 mg/week, IGF bioactivity was almost undetectable. Two partial responses occurred (poorly differentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma and peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumour). Integration of biomarker and response data by Bayesian Logistic Regression Modeling (BLRM) confirmed the RBD. CONCLUSIONS: Xentuzumab was well tolerated; MTD was not reached. RBD was 1000 mg weekly, confirmed by BLRM. Xentuzumab showed preliminary anti-tumour activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01403974; NCT01317420.

A Phase I/Randomized Phase II Study to Evaluate the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of Nintedanib versus Sorafenib in Asian Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nintedanib is an oral, triple angiokinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor/platelet-derived growth factor/fibroblast growth factor receptors. This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase I/II study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in terms of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and efficacy of nintedanib versus sorafenib in Asian patients with unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: For the phase I portion, patients were stratified into two groups according to their alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (ALT/AST) and Child-Pugh score at baseline. For phase I, the primary endpoint was determination of the MTD in terms of DLTs. For phase II, patients with a Child-Pugh score of 5-6, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ≤2, and an ALT/AST ≤2× the upper limit of normal were enrolled and randomized 2: 1 to nintedanib 200 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) (the MTD determined in phase I) or sorafenib 400 mg b.i.d. continuously in 28-day cycles until intolerable adverse events (AEs) or disease progression (PD); treatment beyond PD was allowed if clinical benefit was perceived. The primary endpoint for phase II was time to progression (TTP) by central independent review (CIR; by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.0); the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS). All analyses were exploratory. RESULTS: The MTD was 200 mg in both groups. For phase II, 95 patients were randomized to nintedanib (n = 63) or sorafenib (n = 32). For nintedanib and sorafenib, respectively, the median CIR TTP was 2.8 vs. 3.7 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-2.01) and the median OS 10.2 vs. 10.7 months (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.59-1.49). Nintedanib-treated patients had fewer grade 3 or higher AEs (56 vs. 84%), serious AEs (46 vs. 56%), and AEs leading to dose reduction (19 vs. 59%) and drug discontinuation (24 vs. 34%). AEs associated more frequently with nintedanib were vomiting and nausea, whereas those associated more frequently with sorafenib were ALT/AST increases, diarrhea, rash, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Nintedanib showed numerically similar efficacy to sorafenib for CIR TTP and OS in Asian patients with advanced HCC and adequate liver function. AEs were generally manageable.