Effect of continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting on progression-free survival among patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) positive non-small cell lung cancer.

Abstract

9124 Background: Continuing a 1st generation EGFR TKI with chemotherapy upon TKI progression was not shown to be beneficial in the IMPRESS trial. However, the validity of this approach with osimertinib remains under explored. We attempted to characterize the efficacy of continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting. Methods: A single-center retrospective review of patients with metastatic EGFR mutant NSCLC who had progressed on osimertinib was performed. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were noted. Progression free survival (PFS), duration of treatment (DOT), overall survival (OS) and rates of intracranial progression were captured. ANOVA or a Fisher exact test were used to identify associations between cohort characteristics and treatment outcomes. Differences in PFS, DOT and OS were assessed using a log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: 73 patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC with post-osimertinib treatment outcomes were identified. Cohort characteristics are summarized in Table. Median duration of follow up was 41 months. Upon progression, osimertinib was discontinued in 34 patients (Cohort A) and continued with next line of therapy in 39 patients (Cohort B). Survival analyses were adjusted for prior lines of therapy, use of platinum doublet chemotherapy, and use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the post-progression setting. After adjusting for covariates, continuing osimertinib post-progression was associated with an improved PFS (7 vs 4 months; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 – 1.00; p = 0.003) and DOT (7 vs 4 months; HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31 – 0.87; p = 0.006). There was no difference in OS between Group A and B (52 vs 41 months; HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.43 – 1.24; p = 0.234). Rates of intracranial progression were similar between Group A and B (28% vs 23%; p = 0.649). Conclusions: After adjusting for covariates, continuing osimertinib with chemotherapy in the post-progression setting was associated with a significant difference in PFS and DOT, but with no differences in OS. Continuing osimertinib does not appear to influence the rate of subsequent intracranial progression. Prospective studies are needed to identify the optimal practice pattern.[Table: see text]