A Comparative Study Evaluating the Quality of Life and Survival Outcomes in Patients Receiving Chemotherapy Versus Oral Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor in the Third Line and Beyond Setting for Advanced NSCLC.

Introduction: The outcomes in advanced NSCLC have improved owing to the availability of more effective systemic and improved supportive care. This has increased the number of patients who seek treatment in the third line and beyond setting. We conducted this study to compare the quality of life (QoL), toxicity, and outcomes in patients receiving chemotherapy and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in this setting. Methods: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label study, patients with stage III or IV NSCLC with disease progression on at least two prior lines of chemotherapy, with a life expectancy of at least 3 months, without prior EGFR TKI exposure, and stable brain metastases (if any) were included. Patients were randomized to receive chemotherapy (gemcitabine or docetaxel or paclitaxel or vinorelbine) or an EGFR TKI (erlotinib or gefitinib). The primary end point was the change in QoL at 8 to 10 weeks; the secondary outcomes were safety and overall survival (OS). Patients underwent clinical evaluation at every visit, and toxicity was assessed as per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. A radiological tumor response assessment was done every 8 to 12 weeks from the start of therapy. The QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ C30 and LC13 questionnaires. The change in QoL scores was calculated as the difference between scores at baseline and scores at 8 to 10 weeks (Δ) for each QoL domain. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the mean difference (Δ) for each domain. OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional regression analysis. Results: A total of 246 patients were enrolled in the study, with 123 in each arm. There was a male predominance with 69.1% male patients in the chemotherapy arm and 70.7% in the EGFR TKI arm. The median age of patients in the chemotherapy arm was 54 years and 55 years in the chemotherapy and EGFR TKI arms, respectively. There was no significant difference in the change in QoL at baseline and the second visit (Δ) in both arms in all domains of EORTC QLQ C30 except cognitive function (p = 0.0045) and LC13 except alopecia (0.01249). The mean Δ Global Health Status was -28 in the chemotherapy arm and -26.8 in the EGFR TKI arm; this was not statistically significant (p = 0.973). The median follow-up was 88.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39.04-137.15). On the intention-to-treat analysis, the median PFS was 3.13 months (95% CI: 2.15-4.11) in the chemotherapy arm and 2.26 months (95% CI: 2.1-2.43) in the EGFR TKI arm, with hazard ratio at 1.074 (95% CI: 0.83-1.38) (p = 0.58). There were 120 deaths in each arm. The median OS was 7.63 months (95% CI: 5.96-9.30) in the chemotherapy arm and 7.5 months in the EGFR TKI arm (95% CI: 5.85-9.14); hazard ratio at 1.033 (95% CI: 0.80-1.33) (p = 0.805). The toxicity profile was similar in both arms except for a significantly higher incidence of fatigue (p = 0.043), peripheral neuropathy (0.000), alopecia, hypokalemia (0.037), and pedal edema (0.007) in the chemotherapy arm and dry skin (p = 0.000) and skin rash (p = 0.019) in the EGFR TKI arm. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in most QoL scales (except cognitive function and alopecia), OS, and PFS of patients with advanced NSCLC receiving an EGFR TKI as compared with chemotherapy TKI in the third-line setting. The toxicity profile is consistent with the known toxicities of the agents.

Results of Phase III Randomized Trial for Use of Docetaxel as a Radiosensitizer in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer, Unsuitable for Cisplatin-Based Chemoradiation.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of published literature on systemic therapeutic options in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) undergoing chemoradiation. Docetaxel was assessed as a radiosensitizer in this situation. METHODS: This was a randomized phase II/III study. Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with LAHNSCC planned for chemoradiation and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and who were cisplatin-ineligible were randomly assigned in 1:1 to either radiation alone or radiation with concurrent docetaxel 15 mg/m2 once weekly for a maximum of seven cycles. The primary end point was 2-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The study recruited 356 patients between July 2017 and May 2021. The 2-year DFS was 30.3% (95% CI, 23.6 to 37.4) versus 42% (95% CI, 34.6 to 49.2) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.673; 95% CI, 0.521 to 0.868; P value = .002). The corresponding median overall survival (OS) was 15.3 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 22.0) and 25.5 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 32.5), respectively (log-rank P value = .035). The 2-year OS was 41.7% (95% CI, 34.1 to 49.1) versus 50.8% (95% CI, 43.1 to 58.1) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.747; 95% CI, 0.569 to 0.980; P value = .035). There was a higher incidence of grade 3 or above mucositis (22.2% v 49.7%; P < .001), odynophagia (33.5% v 52.5%; P < .001), and dysphagia (33% v 49.7%; P = .002) with the addition of docetaxel. CONCLUSION: The addition of docetaxel to radiation improved DFS and OS in cisplatin-ineligible patients with LAHNSCC.[Media: see text].

Low-cost oral metronomic chemotherapy versus intravenous cisplatin in patients with recurrent, metastatic, inoperable head and neck carcinoma: an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Regimens for palliation in patients with head and neck cancer recommended by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have low applicability (less than 1-3%) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) because of their cost. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with head and neck cancer who received metronomic chemotherapy had better outcomes when compared with those who received intravenous cisplatin, which is commonly used as the standard of care in LMICs. We aimed to do a phase 3 study to substantiate these findings. METHODS: We did an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Center, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India. We enrolled adult patients (aged 18-70 years) who planned to receive palliative systemic treatment for relapsed, recurrent, or newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1 and measurable disease, as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to receive either oral metronomic chemotherapy, consisting of 15 mg/m2 methotrexate once per week plus 200 mg celecoxib twice per day until disease progression or until the development of intolerable side-effects, or 75 mg/m2 intravenous cisplatin once every 3 weeks for six cycles. Randomisation was done by use of a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with a block size of four, and patients were stratified by primary tumour site and previous cancer-directed treatment. The primary endpoint was median overall survival. Assuming that 6-month overall survival in the intravenous cisplatin group would be 40%, a non-inferiority margin of 13% was defined. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. All patients who completed at least one cycle of the assigned treatment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India, CTRI/2015/11/006388, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2016, and Jan 17, 2020, 422 patients were randomly assigned: 213 to the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 209 to the intravenous cisplatin group. All 422 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, and 418 patients (211 in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 207 in the intravenous cisplatin group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. At a median follow-up of 15·73 months, median overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis population was 7·5 months (IQR 4·6-12·6) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group compared with 6·1 months (3·2-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·773 [95% CI 0·615-0·97, p=0·026]). In the per-protocol analysis population, median overall survival was 7·5 months (4·7-12·8) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 6·1 months (3·4-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·775 [95% CI 0·616-0·974, p=0·029]). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 37 (19%) of 196 patients in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group versus 61 (30%) of 202 patients in the intravenous cisplatin group (p=0·01). INTERPRETATION: Oral metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to intravenous cisplatin with respect to overall survival in head and neck cancer in the palliative setting, and is associated with fewer adverse events. It therefore represents a new alternative standard of care if current NCCN-approved options for palliative therapy are not feasible. FUNDING: Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council. TRANSLATIONS: For the Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Bengali, and Punjabi translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.