Health-related quality-of-life in a randomized phase III first-line study of gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel in clinically selected patients from Asia with advanced NSCLC (IPASS).

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and symptom improvement were preplanned secondary objectives for the overall population and posthoc analyses for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive/negative subgroups in IPASS. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) and Trial Outcome Index (TOI); symptom improvement by the Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS). Improvements defined as: 6 or more (FACT-L; TOI), 2 or more (LCS) points increase maintained for 21 or more days. RESULTS: Overall (n = 1151/1217 evaluable), HRQoL improvement rates were significantly greater with gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel; symptom improvement rates were similar for both treatments. Significantly more patients recorded improvements in HRQoL and symptoms with gefitinib in the EGFR mutation-positive subgroup (n = 259; FACT-L 70.2% versus 44.5%; odds ratio, 3.01 [95% confidence interval, 1.79-5.07]; p < 0.001; TOI 70.2% versus 38.3%; 3.96 [2.33-6.71]; p < 0.001; LCS 75.6% versus 53.9%; 2.70 [1.58-4.62]; p < 0.001), and with carboplatin/paclitaxel in the EGFR mutation-negative subgroup (n = 169; FACT-L 14.6% versus 36.3%; odds ratio, 0.31 [0.15-0.65]; p = 0.002; TOI 12.4% versus 28.8%; 0.35 [0.16-0.79]; p = 0.011; LCS 20.2% versus 47.5%; 0.28 [0.14-0.55]; p < 0.001). Median time-to-worsening (months) FACT-L score was longer with gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel for the overall population (8.3 versus 2.5) and EGFR mutation-positive subgroup (15.6 versus 3.0), and similar for both treatments in the EGFR mutation-negative subgroup (1.4 versus 1.4). Median time-to-improvement with gefitinib was 8 days in patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors who improved. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL and symptom endpoints were consistent with efficacy outcomes in IPASS and favored gefitinib in patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors and carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with EGFR mutation-negative tumors.

Gefitinib or placebo in combination with tamoxifen in patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: a randomized phase II study.

PURPOSE: Increased growth factor signaling may contribute to tamoxifen resistance. This randomized phase II trial assessed tamoxifen plus placebo or the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor gefitinib in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive metastatic breast cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with newly metastatic disease or recurred after adjuvant tamoxifen (stratum 1), or recurred during/after adjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) or after failed first-line AI (stratum 2), were eligible. Primary variables were progression-free survival (PFS; stratum 1) and clinical benefit rate (CBR; stratum 2). A 5% or more improvement in response variables with gefitinib was considered to warrant further investigation. Outcome was correlated with biomarkers measured on the primary tumor. RESULTS: In stratum 1 (n = 206), the PFS HR (gefitinib:placebo) was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.59-1.18; median PFS 10.9 versus 8.8 months). In the stratum 1 endocrine therapy-naïve subset (n = 158) the HR was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.52-1.15), and the prior endocrine-treated subgroup (n = 48) 1.47 (95% CI, 0.63-3.45). In stratum 1, CBRs were 50.5% with gefitinib and 45.5% with placebo. In stratum 2 (n = 84), CBRs were 29.2% with gefitinib and 31.4% with placebo. Biomarker analysis suggested that in stratum 1 there was greater benefit with gefitinib in patients who were ER-negative or had lower levels of ER protein. CONCLUSIONS: In stratum 1, the improved PFS with gefitinib plus tamoxifen met the protocol criteria to warrant further investigation of this strategy. In stratum 2, there was a numerical disadvantage for gefitinib; additional investigation after AI therapy is not warranted. Studies of predictive biomarkers are needed to subset appropriate patients.

Phase II, randomized trial to compare anastrozole combined with gefitinib or placebo in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase II randomized trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of anastrozole combined with gefitinib or anastrozole with placebo in women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive measurable or evaluable MBC who had not received prior endocrine therapy for this disease stage or who developed metastatic disease during/after adjuvant tamoxifen were eligible. The primary response variable was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary response variables included clinical benefit rate, objective response rate, overall survival, safety and tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. Tumor biomarker evaluation was an exploratory objective. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were randomized to anastrozole plus gefitinib and 50 patients were randomized to anastrozole plus placebo of a planned total of 174 patients (enrollment was prematurely discontinued due to slow recruitment). PFS for patients receiving the combination of anastrozole and gefitinib was longer than for patients receiving anastrozole plus placebo [hazard ratio (gefitinib/placebo), 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.94; median PFS, 14.7 versus 8.4 months]. The clinical benefit rate was 49% versus 34%, and the objective response rate was 2% versus 12% with anastrozole plus gefitinib and anastrozole plus placebo, respectively. No evidence of interaction between baseline biomarker levels and relative treatment effect was found. No unexpected adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: This small randomized study showed that anastrozole in combination with gefitinib is associated with a marked advantage in PFS compared with anastrozole plus placebo, and that the combination was tolerated in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive MBC. Further investigation of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition in combination with endocrine therapy may be warranted.

A phase II placebo-controlled trial of neoadjuvant anastrozole alone or with gefitinib in early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Increased epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression may promote breast cancer resistance to endocrine therapy. We have therefore investigated whether neoadjuvant gefitinib, an EGFR inhibitor, might overcome biologic and clinical resistance to neoadjuvant anastrozole in a phase II placebo-controlled trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with stage I to IIIB hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer received anastrozole 1 mg daily for 16 weeks and were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:5:5 to receive, in addition, gefitinib 250 mg/d orally for 16 weeks: placebo 1 tablet/d orally for 2 weeks and then gefitinib for 14 weeks or placebo for 16 weeks. The primary end point was biologic change in proliferation as measured by Ki67 at 2 and 16 weeks; the main secondary end point was overall objective response (OR). RESULTS: Two hundred six women were randomly assigned. Mean changes in Ki67 with anastrozole and gefitinib versus anastrozole alone were -77.4% and -83.6%, respectively, between baseline and 16 weeks (geometric mean ratio = 1.37; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.39; P = .26), -80.1% and -71.3% between baseline and 2 weeks (geometric mean ratio = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.25; P = .22) and -19.3% and -43% (geometric mean ratio = 1.42; 95% CI, 0.86 to 2.35; P = .16) between 2 and 16 weeks. ORs in the combination and anastrozole alone groups were 48% and 61% (estimated difference = -13.1%; 95% CI, -27.3% to 1.2%), respectively, with a nonsignificant trend against the combination (P = .08) and 48% versus 72% (estimated difference = -24.1%; 95% CI, -45.3% to -2.9%) in the progesterone-receptor-positive subgroup, which was significant (P = .03) and consistent with Ki67 changes. Common treatment-related adverse events included diarrhea, rash, alopecia, dry skin, and nausea. There was no evidence of a pharmacokinetic interaction. CONCLUSION: Addition of gefitinib to neoadjuvant anastrozole had no additional clinical or biologic effect, failing to support our original hypothesis.

Randomized controlled trial assessing a traditional Chinese medicine remedy in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea.

A proof-of-concept study to assess the safety and efficacy of a traditional Chinese medicine formula as treatment for primary dysmenorrhea showed no statistically significant benefit over placebo. However, some efficacy parameters suggested possible superiority of the active treatment and so a larger study needs to be performed to determine whether this remedy has a role in the treatment of dysmenorrhea.