A Randomized, Multi-Center, Open Label Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy between Afatinib Monotherapy and Combination Therapy with HAD-B1 for the Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC Patients with EGFR Mutations.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer, especially non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), poses a significant health challenge globally due to its high mortality. Afatinib, a second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI), has shown superior efficacy over traditional chemotherapy in NSCLC treatment. However, issues like secondary resistance and adverse effects call for alternative therapies. HAD-B1, comprising 4 herbal medicines, has shown promise in lung cancer treatment in both preclinical and clinical settings. This study assesses the combination of HAD-B1 and Afatinib in advanced NSCLC patients to potentially improve outcomes by addressing the limitations of current EGFR-TKI therapies. METHOD: A randomized, open-label trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of HAD-B1 with Afatinib in 90 EGFR-mutation-positive NSCLC patients. Participants were divided into treatment and control groups, receiving Afatinib with or without HAD-B1. The study focused on the initial dose maintenance rate and disease control rate (DCR) of Afatinib, alongside secondary outcomes like survival rates and quality of life, under continuous safety monitoring. RESULTS: Among the 90 participants, no significant difference was found in initial dose maintenance (60.98% in the treatment group vs 52.50% in the control, P = .4414) or DCR (80.49% vs 90.00%, P = .2283). Secondary outcomes like PFS, TTP, and OS showed no notable differences. However, physical functioning significantly improved in the treatment group (P = .0475, PPS group). The control group experienced higher rates of adverse events of special interest and adverse drug reactions (P = .01), suggesting HAD-B1 with Afatinib might enhance physical function without increasing adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Combining HAD-B1 with Afatinib potentially improves quality of life and reduces adverse events in advanced NSCLC patients. Further research is necessary to confirm the long-term benefits of this combination therapy, aiming to advance NSCLC treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) of the Republic of Korea, https://cris.nih.go.kr/ (ID: KCT0005414).

Efficacy of transdermal buprenorphine patch for managing withdrawal symptoms in patients with cancer physically dependent on prescription opioids.

BACKGROUND: The physical dependence on prescription opioids among cancer survivors remains an under-investigated area, with a scarcity of well-designed prospective studies. METHODS: This single-arm, phase-2 clinical trial in Korea assessed the efficacy and safety of a transdermal buprenorphine patch (TBP) in managing physical dependence on prescription opioids in cancer survivors, as confirmed through the DSM-5 criteria or psychiatric consultation for opioid withdrawal. This study involved a 4-phase treatment protocol of screening, induction/stabilization, discontinuation, and monitoring. The primary outcome was the rate of successful opioid discontinuation, as measured by a negative urine-drug screening at 8 weeks. Key secondary outcomes included the resumption of prescribed opioids, changes in both the Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), and assessments related to the psychological and physiological aspects of dependence and safety. RESULTS: Thirty-one participants were enrolled. In the intention-to-treat population, the success rate of opioid discontinuation was 58%, with only 2 participants experiencing a resumption of prescribed opioids. Significant reductions were observed in MEDD, which decreased from 98 to 26 mg/day (P < .001), and COWS scores, which decreased from 5.5 to 2.8 (P < .001). Desire to use opioids reduced from 7.0 to 3.0 on a 10-point numeric rating scale (P < .001). Toxicities related to TBP were mild and manageable, without severe precipitated withdrawal symptoms. CONCLUSION: TBP may be considered as an alternative therapeutic option in cancer survivors physically dependent on prescription opioids, especially where sublingual formulations are unavailable.

Attitudes toward Social Issues Related to Opioid Use among Palliative Care Physicians.

Purpose: This study investigated palliative care physicians' attitudes regarding social issues related to opioid use. Methods: An email survey was sent to 674 physicians who were members of the Korean Society for Hospice and Palliative Care (KSHPC). Results: Data from 66 physicians were analyzed (response rate, 9.8%). About 70% of participants stated that their prescribing patterns were not influenced by social issues related to opioid use, and 90% of participants thought that additional regulations should be limited to non-cancer pain. Under the current circumstances, pain education for physicians is urgently needed, as well as increased awareness among the public. Half of the respondents identified the KSHPC as the primary organization responsible for providing pain education. Conclusion: Palliative care physicians' prescribing patterns were not influenced by social issues related to opioid use, and these issues also should not affect cancer pain control.

Impact of PIK3CA and cell cycle pathway genetic alterations on durvalumab efficacy in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Post hoc analysis of TRIUMPH study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate whether genetic alterations in PI3KCA and the cell cycle pathways influence the efficacy of durvalumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) who had previously failed platinum-based treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained data from a phase II umbrella trial of patients with HNSCC who failed platinum-based treatment (TRIUMPH, NCT03292250). Patients receiving durvalumab treatment comprised those with PIK3CA alterations (Group A), those with cell cycle pathway alterations such as CDKN2A (Group B), and those with no druggable genetic alterations (Group C). We analyzed the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in each group and evaluated the potential predictive factors for durvalumab. RESULTS: We analyzed the data of 87 patients: 18, 12, and 57 in groups A, B, and C, respectively. The ORRs were 27.8 %, 8.3 %, and 15.8 % in Groups A, B, and C, respectively (P = 0.329), and the median PFS for each group was 2.3, 1.6, and 1.7 months, respectively, with no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.24). Notably, patients with lower neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (≤5.8) had longer PFS (median, 2.8 vs 1.6 months, P < 0.001), while those with lower platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (≤491.2) exhibited longer PFS (median, 1.8 vs 1.2 months, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Durvalumab's efficacy was similar, irrespective of the presence of PIK3CA or cell cycle pathway genetic alterations in patients with platinum-resistant HNSCC. The NLR and PLR may be promising predictive biomarkers.

Real-world outcomes of third-line immune checkpoint inhibitors versus irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a Korean, multicenter study (KCSG ST22-06).

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) or irinotecan-based chemotherapy is frequently used after failure of second-line paclitaxel plus ramucirumab treatment for patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment in patients with AGC. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with AGC, whose third-line treatment started between July 2019 and June 2021 at 17 institutions in Korea. The ICI group included patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab, and the irinotecan-based chemotherapy group included patients who received irinotecan or FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan). RESULTS: A total of 363 patients [n = 129 (ICI) and n = 234 (irinotecan-based chemotherapy)] were analyzed. The median progression-free survival was 2.3 and 2.9 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.802). The median overall survival (OS) was 5.5 and 6.0 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.786). For all patients included in this study, multivariable analysis showed that weight loss, peritoneal metastasis, low serum sodium or albumin, and short duration of second-line treatment were associated with inferior OS (p < 0.05). ICI showed significantly longer OS than irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients without peritoneal metastasis. Whereas ICI showed significantly shorter OS in patients without PD-L1 expression than irinotecan-based chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in survival outcome was observed between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment for AGC patients. ICI might be preferred for patients without peritoneal metastasis and irinotecan-based chemotherapy for patients with tumors without PD-L1 expression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in the Clinical Trial Registry of Korea ( https://cris.nih.go.kr : KCT 0007732).

Treatment Patterns and Prognosis of Palliative Chemotherapy Combined With Targeting Agents in Patients With Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: CHOICE, A Multicenter Longitudinal Observational Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study investigated the treatment patterns and prognosis of patients with metastatic or unresectable colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with chemotherapy with targeting agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This longitudinal multicenter study included 963 patients with mCRC who were treated in Korea between 2016 and 2020. Treatment patterns and efficacy were compared according to the mutation status and clinical factors. RESULTS: As first-line therapy, most of the patients (83.5%) received FOLFOX plus bevacizumab (35.4%), followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (18.8%), FOLFIRI plus cetuximab (17.0%), and FOLFOX plus cetuximab (12.3%). Bevacizumab was the most frequent agent (78.8%) combined with chemotherapy in RAS-mutated CRC, while cetuximab (57.2%) in RAS wild-type CRC. Cetuximab was frequently combined with a doublet regimen in patients with left-sided CRC than in those with right-sided CRC (34.4% vs. 16%). As second-line therapy, most patients (63.4%) also received doublet regimens with bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI plus aflibercept was administered in 15.1%. The objective response rate with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab was significantly higher in patients with left-sided CRC than in those with right-sided CRC (59.2% vs. 30.8%, p=0.008) and marginally higher in patients with RAS wild-type CRC than in those with RAS-mutated CRC (55.6% vs. 0.0%, p=0.092). Progression-free survival (PFS) with FOLFOX plus bevacizumab was significantly shorter than that with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (p=0.030) in RAS-mutated CRC, whereas there were no significant differences between regimens in RAS wild-type CRC. CONCLUSION: In patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, doublet chemotherapy with targeting agents is the most common therapy and efficacy depends on the mutation status as well as clinical factors.