Gefitinib Arm Research Articles

EGFR-TKIs Combined with Allogeneic CD8+ NKT Cell Immunotherapy to Treat Patients with Advanced EGFR-Mutated Lung Cancer.

Background: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of allogenic CD8 + natural killer T (CD8+ NKT) immunotherapy combined with gefitinib in the treatment of advanced or metastatic EGFR mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: This study is prospective. The NSCLC patients with exon 19 (Ex19del) or exon 21 L858R point mutations, and response to gefitinib treatment were enrolled into the trial to be randomly assigned into the gefitinib arm and the gefitinib/NKT arm. Allogenic CD8+ NKT cells were cultured in vitro and adaptive transferred into the patients via vein in the gefitinib/NKT arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoint analysis included time to disease progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), levels of serum tumour markers for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in the blood, the response rate and safety. From July 2017 to June 2021, 19 patients were randomly assigned to the gefitinib arm (n = 8) and the gefitinib/NKT arm (n = 11). Results: The estimated median survival PFS in the gefitinib/NKT arm was significantly longer than that of the gefitinib arm (12 months vs 7 months). Similar results were also observed for the median TTP. Moreover, the gefitinib/NKT arm had better CEA control than the gefitinib arm. Clinical grade 3 adverse reactions occurred in 64% and 39% of patients in the gefitinib/NKT arm and the gefitinib arm, respectively. The most common grade 3 adverse events in the gefitinib/NKT arm included abnormal liver function in 8 cases (73%) and diarrhoea in 1 case (9%), both of which resolved after drug intervention. Conclusion: The PFS of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC treated with allogenic CD8+ NKT cells combined with gefitinib was longer than that of gefitinib alone. No obvious serious adverse reactions occurred, and the patients compliance and survival status were good.

Phase III randomized controlled trial of gefitinib versus chemotherapy in EGFR-positive treatment-naïve metastatic lung cancer: Long-term outcome after eight years

Background: This was the first Phase III randomized study comparing an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), gefitinib, to standard-of-care chemotherapy (pemetrexed + carboplatin followed by pemetrexed maintenance) in advanced EGFR-mutated lung cancer. The initial interim analysis showed the superiority of gefitinib over chemotherapy in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes. Our primary endpoint was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) and duration of response (DOR). Materials and Methods: This was a Phase III open-label, randomized, parallel-group study conducted in the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India, in patients with EGFR mutation-positive treatment-naïve Stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma. Patients were randomized to gefitinib (250 mg orally daily) or carboplatin (area under the curve 5) and pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) chemotherapy, followed by maintenance pemetrexed (500 mg/m2). Results: Between February 2012 and April 2016, 290 patients were randomized:145 to each arm. At a median follow-up of 104 months, all 290 (100%) patients had progressed, and 287 (99%) deaths had occurred. The median OS in the gefitinib arm was 19.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7-24.8) compared to 22.6 months (95% CI, 19.2-25.2) in the chemotherapy arm; hazard ratio [HR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.87-1.39; P, 0.423. The median PFS2 in the gefitinib arm was 15.5 months (95% CI, 13.5-18.1) compared to 12.5 months (95% CI, 11.1-14.5) in the chemotherapy arm; HR, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.66-1.13); P, 0.270. The median DOR was improved in the gefitinib arm (7.6 months; 95% CI, 5.45-9.88) compared to 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.49-6.35) in the chemotherapy arm; HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42-0.82; P, 0.002. The 5-year survival was 4.1% in the gefitinib arm versus 6.8% in the chemotherapy arm. Conclusions: This study establishes the advantages of first-line EGFR TKI therapy over chemotherapy in terms of a durable response and numerically superior PFS2. Due to crossover post-progression, there was is no significant difference in OS (Clinical Trials Registry of India number: CTRI/2015/08/006113).

Abstract CT538: Tepotinib + gefitinib in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with MET amplification: Final analysis of INSIGHT

Abstract Introduction: In the INSIGHT trial primary analysis (NCT01982955; median follow-up: 21.8 months), tepotinib (a potent, highly selective, once daily [QD] MET inhibitor) + gefitinib improved efficacy vs chemotherapy (CTX) in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and resistance to anti-EGFR therapy due to MET amplification (Wu et al, Lancet Respir Med 2020). Here we report final analyses from INSIGHT (data cut-off: September 3, 2021; median follow-up: 57.5 months). Methods: Patients with EGFR-mutant (T790M-negative) NSCLC and anti-EGFR resistance, with MET gene copy number (GCN) ≥5 and/or MET:CEP7 ≥2 by FISH and/or MET IHC 2+/3+, were randomized to tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) + gefitinib 250 mg QD or CTX. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator. Preplanned analyses evaluated patients with MET amplification. Results: In the 19/55 randomized patients (34.5%) with MET amplification (GCN ≥5, n=18; MET:CEP7 ≥2, n=13; MET IHC 3+, n=17), median age was 60.4 years, 68.4% were never-smokers, and prior EGFR inhibitors were gefitinib (57.9%), afatinib (21.1%), erlotinib (10.5%) and icotinib (10.5%). Median duration of tepotinib + gefitinib was 11.3 months (range: 1.1-56.5), with treatment duration >1 year in 6 patients (31.6%) and >4 years in 3 patients (15.8%). Two patients continued treatment outside the study. Tepotinib + gefitinib improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04, 0.43), overall survival (HR 0.10; 95% CI 0.02, 0.36), objective response rate and duration of response vs CTX (Table). Treatment-related Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 7 patients (58.3%) with tepotinib + gefitinib and 5 (71.4%) with CTX. Most common post-study therapies were kinase inhibitors (n=2 in the tepotinib + gefitinib arm; n=3 in the CTX arm). In patients with MET IHC 3+ (n=34; including 17 patients with MET amplification), tepotinib + gefitinib also markedly improved PFS (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.17, 0.74) and OS (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.23, 0.84) vs CTX. Conclusions: Tepotinib + gefitinib greatly improved PFS and OS vs CTX in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with MET amplification. INSIGHT 2 is evaluating tepotinib + osimertinib in this setting. Table. Summary of efficacy and safety data in patients with MET amplification Endpoint Tepotinib + gefitinib (n=12) CTX (n=7) PFS Events, n (%) 7 (58) 7 (100) Median, months (90% CI) 16.6 (8.3, 22.1) 4.2 (1.4, 7.0) HR (90% CI) 0.13 (0.04, 0.43) OS* Events, n (%) 7 (58) 7 (100) Median, months (90% CI) 37.3 (21.1, 52.1) 13.1 (3.3, 22.6) HR (90% CI) 0.10 (0.02, 0.36) ORR n (%) [90% CI] 8 (66.7) [39.1, 87.7] 3 (42.9) [12.9, 77.5] OR (90% CI) 2.67 (0.37, 19.56) DOR Median, months (90% CI) 19.9 (7.0, NE) 2.8 (2.8, NE) Treatment-related Grade ≥3 AEs†, n (%) Amylase increased 4 (33.3) 0 Lipase increased 4 (33.3) 0 Anemia 0 2 (28.6) Neutrophil count decreased 0 2 (28.6) WBC count decreased 0 2 (28.6) *Post-study therapy included an EGFR inhibitor ± a MET inhibitor in two patients in each arm (tepotinib + gefitinib arm: osimertinib ± cabozantinib [n=1], gefitinib + cabozantinib [n=1]; CTX arm: erlotinib, afatinib, and osimertinib ± crizotinib [n=1], osimertinib [n=1]). Post-study CTX was received by one patient in the tepotinib + gefitinib arm and two patients in the CTX arm.†Reported in >20% of patients in either arm. AE, adverse event; CI, confidence interval; CTX, chemotherapy; DOR, duration of response; HR, hazard ratio; NE, not estimable; ORR, objective response rate; OR, odds ratio; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; WBC, white blood cell. Citation Format: Chong Kin Liam, Azura Rozila Ahmad, Te-Chun Hsia, Jianying Zhou, Dong-Wan Kim, Ross Andrew Soo, Ying Cheng, Shun Lu, Sang Won Shin, James Chih-Hsin Yang, Yiping Zhang, Jun Zhao, Rolf Bruns, Andreas Johne, Yi-Long Wu. Tepotinib + gefitinib in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with MET amplification: Final analysis of INSIGHT [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT538.

Evaluation of the Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitors on the Efficacy of Dacomitinib and Gefitinib in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and EGFR-Activating Mutations.

IntroductionDacomitinib and gefitinib are irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) indicated for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and EGFR-activating mutations. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies in healthy volunteers suggested that acid-reducing drugs such as proton pump inhibitors (PPI) decreased dacomitinib and gefitinib exposure by limiting the pH-dependent absorption. This analysis retrospectively evaluates the effect of concomitant PPI use on dacomitinib exposure and on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with dacomitinib 45 mg QD or gefitinib 250 mg QD in a 1:1 randomized phase 3 study (ARCHER 1050).MethodsThe analysis grouped all patients (n = 452) treated in each arm of the study as non-PPI users, PPI users, or extensive PPI users. PFS and OS data were presented by Kaplan–Meier plots and analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. Dacomitinib exposure was compared using a linear mixed-effects model.ResultsResults showed that dacomitinib PFS and OS did not differ significantly when comparing PPI users (N = 59) to non-PPI users (N = 152), while extensive PPI users (N = 24) had shorter PFS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.94, p = 0.011] and OS (HR: 1.77, p = 0.027) when compared to non-PPI users. For patients treated with gefitinib, PFS did not differ significantly when comparing PPI users (N = 51) and extensive PPI users (N = 19) to non-PPI users (N = 159); however, both PPI users (HR: 1.65, p = 0.007) and extensive PPI users (HR: 1.70, p = 0.050) had shorter OS when compared to non-PPI users. Further analysis by adjusting potential confounders indicated no statistically significant differences in PFS or OS between any PPI user vs. non-PPI user groups in the dacomitinib and gefitinib arms. PPI use did not appear to affect dacomitinib exposure.ConclusionIn conclusion, PPI use in patients with NSCLC likely has minimal impact on dacomitinib or gefitinib efficacy despite decreased absorption of these drugs observed in PK studies.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01774721

Adjuvant gefitinib versus cisplatin/vinorelbine in Japanese patients with completely resected, EGFR-mutated, stage II-III non-small cell lung cancer (IMPACT, WJOG6410L): A randomized phase 3 trial.

8501 Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor is a standard of care for EGFR mutation-positive, untreated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the efficacy and safety of adjuvant gefitinib for patients with completely resected lung cancer harboring EGFR mutation over cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy were not known in 2011 when this study was initiated. Methods: From September 2011 to December 2015, we randomly assigned 234 patients with completely resected, EGFR mutation-positive (exon 19 deletion or L858R), stage II–III NSCLC to receive either gefitinib (250 mg, once daily) for 24 months or cisplatin (80 mg/m2 on day 1) plus vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) (cis/vin) every 3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) according to a central review in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results: Two patients in the gefitinib arm withdrew consent and were excluded from the ITT population. No treatment-related deaths were seen in the gefitinib arm, but three treatment-related deaths were reported in the cis/vin arm. Median duration of follow-up was 71 months. Median DFS was numerically longer in the gefitinib arm (36 months) than in the cis/vin arm (25.2 months). However, Kaplan-Meier curves began to overlap around 5 years after surgery, and no significant difference in DFS was seen, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.67–1.28; P = 0.63). Overall survival was also not significantly different (median not reached in either arm). Five-year survival rates for gefitinib and cis/vin arms were 78.0% and 74.6%, respectively, with an HR for death of 1.03; 95%CI, 0.65–1.65; P = 0.89. Exploratory subset analysis revealed that patients ³70 years old in the gefitinib arm (n = 19/27 with G to cis/vin) survived longer than those in the cis/vin arm (HR 0.31; 95%CI, 0.10–0.98; P = 0.046). Conclusions: Adjuvant gefitinib appeared to prevent early relapse, but did not significantly prolong DFS or OS in patients with completely resected stage II–III, EGFR-mutated NSCLC. The apparent non-inferiority of DFS/OS may justify the use of adjuvant gefitinib in selected subset of patients, especially those deemed unsuitable for cis/vin adjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006252.

Dacomitinib in first-line treatment of advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: acost-effectiveness analysis.

Aim:To assess the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatment with dacomitinib compared with gefitinib in patients newly diagnosed with advanced NSCLC EGFR-positive in the context of Spain. Materials & methods: A partitioned survival model was developed including costs, utilities and disutilities to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio when treating with dacomitinib versus gefitinib. Results: Dacomitinib presented higher QALYs (0.51) compared with gefitinib (0.45). Dacomitinib costs were €33,061 in comparison with €26,692 for gefitinib arm. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €111,048 was obtained for dacomitinib. Conclusion: Dacomitinib was more effective in terms of QALYs gained than gefitinib. However, to obtain a cost-effectiveness alternative, a discount greater than 25% in dacomitinib acquisition cost is required.

BRCA1 Expression and Outcome in Patients With EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Treated With Gefitinib Alone or in Combination With Olaparib

IntroductionDNA repair capacity, as exemplified by BRCA1 gene expression, is related with outcome to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Olaparib, a PARP inhibitor, reduces BRCA1 expression. Olaparib was tested in combination with gefitinib versus gefitinib single agent, as a first-line therapy for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the GOAL study (trial registration: NCT01513174). Here, we report the results of the biomarker-related prespecified secondary objectives of the GOAL study. MethodsWe evaluated the impact of BRCA1 mRNA expression in 91 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Of those 91 patients, 51 were randomized to treatment with gefitinib and 40 were randomized to treatment with gefitinib plus olaparib. We explored in vitro whether BRCA1 mRNA levels are related with outcome to gefitinib plus olaparib. The expression levels of 53BP1, CtIP, and AXL were also explored and correlated with the treatment outcome. ResultsOverall, as what happened in the GOAL study, no statistically significant difference was observed in median progression-free survival (PFS) between the two treatment arms, for the 91 patients of the present study (p = 0.2419). For patients with high BRCA1 mRNA expression (BRCA1-high group), median PFS was 12.9 months in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm, compared with 9.2 months in the gefitinib arm (p = 0.0449). In the gefitinib arm, median PFS was 9.1 months for the BRCA1-high group and 10.2 months for the BRCA1-low group (p = 0.0193). We observed a more pronounced synergism of gefitinib plus olaparib in cells with higher BRCA1 compared with those with low BRCA1 mRNA expression. ConclusionsHigh BRCA1 mRNA expression identified patients with NSCLC who benefited from gefitinib plus olaparib in the GOAL phase 2 clinical trial.

Combination of gefitinib and olaparib versus gefitinib alone in EGFR mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A multicenter, randomized phase II study (GOAL)

ObjectivesProgression-free survival (PFS) and response rate to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) varies in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) driven byEGFR mutations, suggesting that other genetic alterations may influence oncogene addiction. Low BRCA1 mRNA levels correlate with longer PFS in erlotinib-treated EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Since the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib, may attenuate and/or prevent BRCA1 expression, the addition of olaparib to gefitinib could improve outcome in EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC. Materials and methodsGOAL was a multicenter, randomized phase IB/II study performed in two countries, Spain and Mexico. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, treatment-naïve, pathologically confirmed stage IV NSCLC, with centrally confirmed EGFR mutations and measurable disease. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg daily or gefitinib 250 mg daily plus olaparib 200 mg three times daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rate, safety and tolerability. ResultsBetween September 2013, and July 2016, 182 patients underwent randomization, 91 received gefitinib and 91 received gefitinib plus olaparib. There were no differences in gender, age, smoking status, performance status, presence of bone and brain metastases or type ofEGFR mutation. Median PFS was 10.9 months (95 % CI 9.3–13.3) in the gefitinib arm and 12.8 months (95 % CI 9.1–14.7) in the gefitinib plus olaparib arm (HR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.00–1.92; p = 0.124). The most common adverse events were anemia, 78 % in gefitinib plus olaparib group, 38 % in gefitinib arm, diarrhea, 65 % and 60 %, and fatigue, 40 % and 32 %, respectively. ConclusionsThe gefitinib plus olaparib combination did not provide significant benefit over gefitinib alone. The combination’s safety profile showed an increase in hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity, compared to gefitinib alone, however, no relevant adverse events were noted.

The efficacy of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with co-medications in Asian patients with EGFR mutation non-small cell lung cancer

The real-world efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR-activating mutations remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the claims database of Taipei Veterans General Hospital to perform direct comparisons of these three EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib) combined with co-medications (metformin, statins, antacids, and steroids). Stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations receiving EGFR-TKIs as first-line treatment for > 3 months between 2011 and 2016 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Patients who had received co-medications (≥ 28 defined daily doses) in the first 3 months of EGFR-TKI therapy were assigned to co-medications groups. A total of 853 patients treated with gefitinib (n = 534), erlotinib (n = 220), and afatinib (n = 99) were enrolled. The median duration of TTF was 11.5 months in the gefitinib arm, 11.7 months in the erlotinib arm, and 16.1 months in the afatinib arm (log-rank test, P < 0.001). After adjustments, afatinib showed lower risk of treatment failure compared with gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–0.71) and erlotinib (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46–0.83). The risk of treatment failure in patients treated with EGFR-TKIs who received concomitant systemic glucocorticoid therapy was higher than in those treated with EGFR-TKI monotherapy (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.08–2.01). Afatinib or erlotinib use was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations compared to gefitinib use. Concurrent use of systemic glucocorticoids was linked to higher risk of treatment failure.

First-iGAP: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Phase II Study of First-line Intercalated Gefitinib and Pemetrexed-Cisplatin Chemotherapy for Never-Smoker Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients

BackgroundWe aimed to evaluate whether intercalated combination of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib and chemotherapy improves survival outcomes in never-smokers with advanced lung adenocarcinoma. Patients and MethodsNever-smokers with chemo-naive stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive either gefitinib or placebo on days 5 to 18 of a 3-weekly cycle of pemetrexed and cisplatin. Chemotherapy was given up to 9 cycles, after which gefitinib or placebo was given daily. Patients in the placebo arm who had progression were crossed over to receive gefitinib. ResultsBetween June 2012 and December 2014, 76 patients with median age of 58.0 years were randomized, 39 on gefitinib and 37 on the placebo arm. EGFR mutation was positive in 34 (44.7%) patients. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the 2 arms. The gefitinib arm had a better response rate (79.5% vs. 51.4%, P = .010) and median progression-free survival (PFS) (12.4 vs. 6.7 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.49, P = .005) than the placebo arm; however, there was no statistically significant difference in median overall survival between the 2 arms (31.8 vs. 22.9 months, HR 0.78, P = .412). The PFS benefit of intercalated use of gefitinib over placebo was more apparent for patients with EGFR-mutant tumors (13.3 vs. 7.8 months, P = .025) than those with EGFR–wild-type tumors (8.2 vs. 6.6 months, P = .063). Overall, there was no difference in the frequency of severe adverse effect between the 2 arms. ConclusionsIntercalated combination of gefitinib with pemetrexed and cisplatin was well tolerated and improved PFS in never-smoker patients with lung adenocarcinoma.

Icotinib is as efficacious as gefitinib for brain metastasis of EGFR mutated non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundThe prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases is very poor. Currently, therapeutic methods for this patient population include whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), surgery, radiosurgery and systemic treatment. Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) could be effective on cerebral metastases of mutated NSCLC. However, which EGFR-TKIs is more appropriate is still unknown.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of advanced NSCLC patients with brain metastases for EGFR targeted therapy from November 2013 to April 2018 at Dongguan People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, China. A total of 43 patients were recruit in this study. Among them, 21 cases received icotinib (125 mg, thrice a day) and 22 cases received gefitinib (250 mg, once a day) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point of this study was intracranial PFS (iPFS). The relationships between therapeutic arms and patients characteristics were performed using Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. The differences in PFS among the two arms were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log rank tests.ResultsThere was no significant difference of intracranial ORR (66.6% versus 59.1%, P = 0.62) and DCR (85.7% versus 81.8%, P = 0.73) between the two arms. The median intracranial PFS (iPFS) for icotinib and gefitinib arms were 8.4 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 11.3 months) and 10.6 months (95% CI, 6.3 to 14.8 months), respectively (P = 0.17). Adverse events of the two study arms were generally mild. None of the patients experienced dose reduction of EGFR-TKIs.ConclusionsOur study showed that icotinib and gefitinib had similar efficacy for brain metastasis of EGFR mutated NSCLC. Large randomized studies are suggested to further illuminate the effect of these two EGFR-TKIs on cerebral lesions of NSCLC.

Genomic Signature for Personalized Adjuvant Therapy in Resected &lt;i&gt;EGFR&lt;/i&gt;-Mutant Stage II-III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results from Phase 3 ADJVANT/CTONG1104 Study

Background: The ADJUVANT study reported the comparative superiority of adjuvant gefitinib over chemotherapy in disease-free survival (DFS) of resected EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, inconsistent clinical benefits have necessitated precise genetic categorization to reevaluate the benefit and risk assessment. Methods: Total 171 baseline surgical specimens from the ADJUVANT trial (n=95, gefitinib arm; n=76, VP arm) underwent targeted sequencing of 422 cancer-related genes. Predictive biomarkers of DFS were identified by Cox proportional hazard regression with gene-by-treatment interactions. A multi-gene composite score, MINERVA (Multiple-gene INdex to Evaluate the Relative benefit of Various Adjuvant therapies), that incorporates the predictive value of selected biomarkers, was developed for survival stratification based on the ratio of 2-year DFS rate and the difference in median DFS. The model was internally validated using ten-fold and leave-one-out cross-validation methods. Findings: TP53 exon4/5 mutations, RB1 alterations, and copy number gains of NKX2-1, CDK4, and MYC were identified as significant predictors for DFS and integrated into MINERVA score. Although updated overall OS presented no difference between adjuvant TKI and chemotherapy, MINERVA categorized patients into three subgroups. In Highly TKI-Preferable group (n=60, 35%), gefitinib achieved significantly longer median DFS than chemotherapy (34.5 vs 9.1 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.21; p<0.001), higher 2-year DFS rate (70.3% vs 11.0%, 6.4 times) and 5-year OS rate (67.3% vs 38.3%; HR 0.43; p=0.018). Conversely, in the Chemo-Preferable group (n=24, 14%), gefitinib led to shorter median DFS (19.3 vs 34.2 months; HR 3.06; p=0.041), lower 2-year DFS rate (41.6% vs 69.2%, -1.7 times) and 5-year OS rate (28.3% vs. 61.5%; HR 2.47; p=0.12). Finally, in the TKI-Preferable group (n=87, 51%), relative survival benefit was similar to that of the pre-categorized cohort. Interpretation: MINERVA score of integrated genomic signature has potential for personalized adjuvant therapy of resected stage II-IIIA EGFR-mutant NSCLCs. Funding Statement: The study was sponsored by the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG) and the following grants: Key Lab System Project of Guangdong Science and Technology Department -Guangdong Provincial Key Lab of Translational Medicine in Lung Cancer (Grant No. 2017B030314120, to Prof. Yi-Long Wu), National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.81872510, to Prof. Wen-Zhao Zhong), and Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital Intermural Program (Grant No. DFJH201917, to Dr. Si-Yang Liu). Declaration of Interests: LW declares speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. W-ZZ declares speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Roche. Y-LW reports consulting and advisory services and declare speaker fees for Roche, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, MSD and BMS. HB, YeC, XT, XW, and YS are employees of Geneseeq Technology Inc., Nanjing, China. All other authors declare no conflict of interest. Ethics Approval Statement: The study was approved by the research ethics boards of the participating hospitals, and was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All the patients provided written informed consent for participating in this predefined biomarker study.

1441PD - A comprehensive model of genetic-features predicts outcome of personalized adjuvant treatment in resected EGFR-mutant stage II-IIIA NSCLC: Results from a phase III trial (CTONG 1104-ADJUVANT)

BackgroundResults of the ADJUVANT trial established adjuvant gefitinib as an optimal choice for EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIA NSCLC patients. However, clinical benefit varied among patients. To investigate this heterogeneity, we performed comprehensive tumor genomic analyses on these patients. Here, we report the predictive MEDUSA model (Multiple-biomarker Evaluation to Determine the Utilization of Specific Adjuvant therapy) that can guide clinical decision of adjuvant therapy. Methods171 baseline specimens from ADJUVANT (n=95, gefitinib arm; n=76, vinorelbine plus cisplatin [VP] arm) underwent targeted sequencing (Geneseeq 422-gene panel). Predictive biomarkers were identified by Cox regression with gene-by-treatment interactions, and a multi-gene composite score was developed to compare the benefits of these treatments. ResultsEGFR mutations were confirmed in all cases. TP53, NKX2-1, CDK4, MYC and RB1 were identified as predictive biomarkers. Specifically, gefitinib-favoring biomarkers include TP53 exon4/5 mutations (interaction HR [iHR] 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.93, p=0.035), and copy number gain of NKX2-1 (iHR 0.26, 95% CI 0.098-0.68, p=0.006), CDK4 (iHR 0.14, 95% CI 0.025-0.77, p=0.024) and MYC (iHR 0.10, 95% CI 0.011-0.98, p=0.048). RB1 alterations strongly favored VP (iHR 4.07, 95% CI 1.56-10.53, p=0.004). The MEDUSA model was developed based on the above, and stratified patients into 3 groups: Strong Gefitinib-favoring (SG, n=60), Moderate Gefitinib-favoring (MG, n=87), and VP-favoring (VP, n=24). Notably, the SG group demonstrated significant OS benefit with adjuvant gefitinib as well: HR of OS was 0.44 (95% CI 0.2-0.98, p=0.04).Table: 1441PDTable: 1441PDMEDUSA ScoremDFS (m)2y DFS(%)HR(95% CI)PSG≤-0.534.5 vs 9.170.3 vs 11.00.21 (0.1-0.43)<0.0001MG-0.5 to 0.532.8 vs 20.767.5 vs 41.00.61 (0.35-1.07)0.08VP≥0.519.3 vs 34.241.6 vs 69.23.07 (0.98-9.52)0.04 ConclusionsIncorporating alterations in TP53, NKX2-1, CDK4, MYC and RB1, MEDUSA score could guide personalized adjuvant therapy for resected stage II-IIIA EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Clinical trial identificationNCT01405079; Release at July 29. 2011. Legal entity responsible for the studyChinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG). FundingAstraZeneca Roche. DisclosureY. Wu: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self): Pfizer; Honoraria (self): MSD; Honoraria (self): BMS; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim. H. Bao: Full / Part-time employment: Geneseeq Technology Inc. Toronto. Y. Chen: Full / Part-time employment: Geneseeq Technology Inc. Nanjing. Y.W. Shao: Full / Part-time employment: Geneseeq Technology Inc. Nanjing. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis of a Phase III randomized trial to compare the benefit of gefitinib versus pemetrexed/carboplatin for epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer

Background:> In an open-label, Phase III randomized study, gefitinib was found to be superior to pemetrexed-platinum in terms of progression-free survival in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer. In this analysis, we have assessed the efficacy of gefitinib over pemetrexed-platinum using quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) of treatment analysis method. Methods: The overall survival in each arm was partitioned into the following three health states: time spent in Grade 2 or above toxicity after randomization and before progression (TOX state), time spent after randomization and before progression without Grade 2 or above toxicity (TWiST state), and time spent after progression (REL state). The mean Q-TWiST was calculated for each arm using utility coefficients of 0.65 for TOX, 0.71 for TWiST, and 0.67 for REL states. The difference in Q-TWiST and the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference were calculated using a nonparametric bootstrap.P= 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean TOX duration (37.6 vs. 16.2 days,P Conclusion: The mean Q-TWiST of patients in the gefitinib arm was similar to that of patients in the pemetrexed-carboplatin arm. These results challenge the superiority of sequencing gefitinib followed by chemotherapy over pemetrexed-carboplatin followed by gefitinib in terms of Q-TWiST.

Osimertinib versus standard-of-care EGFR-TKI as first-line treatment for EGFRm advanced NSCLC: FLAURA Japanese subset.

The FLAURA study was a multicenter, double-blind, Phase 3 study in which patients with previously untreated epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma were randomized 1:1 to oral osimertinib 80 mg once daily or standard-of-care (gefitinib 250 mg or erlotinib 150 mg, once daily) to compare safety and efficacy. In the overall FLAURA study, significantly better progression-free survival was shown with osimertinib versus standard-of-care. Selected endpoints, including progression-free survival (primary endpoint), overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response and safety were evaluated for the Japanese subset of the FLAURA study. In Japan, 120 eligible Japanese patients were randomized to osimertinib (65 patients) or gefitinib (55 patients) treatment from December 2014 to June 2017. Median progression-free survival was 19.1 (95% confidence interval, 12.6, 23.5) and 13.8 (95% confidence interval, 8.3, 16.6) months with osimertinib and gefitinib, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.38, 0.99). Median overall survival was not reached in either treatment arm (data were immature). In the osimertinib and gefitinib arms, objective response rate was 75.4% (49/65) and 76.4% (42/55), and median duration of response from onset was 18.4 (95% confidence interval, not calculated) and 9.5 (95% confidence interval, 6.2, 13.9) months, respectively. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. The frequency of Grade ≥3 interstitial lung disease and pneumonitis in the two groups were the same (one patient). As the first-line therapy, osimertinib showed significantly improved efficacy versus gefitinib in the Japanese population of the FLAURA study. No new safety concerns were raised. NCT02296125 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

MS 14.03 Estimating Prognosis - How Accurate Can We Be?

MS 14.03 Estimating Prognosis - How Accurate Can We Be?

P2.03-027 Comparative Longitudinal Toxicity Analysis of EGFR Mutated NSCLC Treated with Either Pemetrexed Carboplatin or Gefitinib

Toxicity analysis in randomized studies is classically reported as maximum grade toxicity occurring during the course of treatment. Unfortunately, the duration of toxicity is neglected. Patients receiving targeted therapy like gefitinib frequently have low grade continuous toxicities. Longitudinal toxicity analysis may be a more appropriate method of quantifying and comparing toxicity. EGFR mutated NSCLC patients treated with gefitinib or pemetrexed-carboplatin as a part of randomized study were selected for this analysis. Patients were evaluated on the 7th day after the start of therapy and then on days 15, 21, 42, 63, 84,105 and then subsequently every 2 months till progression. Toxicities in accordance with CTCAE version 4.02 occurring during each visit were documented at each visit. Three toxicities were selected for this analysis and these were diarrhea, skin rash and fatigue. R software was used for analysis. Maximum grade toxicity and longitudinal time -toxicity analysis was performed. Toxicities were compared between the 2 arms using both methods. Among the 290 patients, half each were randomized to gefitinib and pemetrexed-carboplatin arm respectively. Any grade diarrhea was seen in 22% of patients receiving gefitinib as opposed to 12% receiving pemetrexed-platinum (p-0.12%). Similar higher proportion of toxicity was seen in gefitinib arm for skin rash (33% versus 13%, p-0.00).The proportion of fatigue in gefitinib and pemetrexed -platinum arm were similar (6% versus 9%, p-0.59). The longitudinal time-toxicity analysis revealed that both rash and diarrhea were higher and more sustained in gefitinib arm. The difference area under the curve for rash and diarrhea were 10 units (p-0.192) and 21.89 units (p-0.09) respectively. The fatigue was similar in both arms (p-0.779) Longitudinal time -toxicity analysis provides information which is clinically relevant and might impact patients quality of life and hence should be performed in patients receiving targeted therapies.

Intercalating and maintenance gefitinib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in selected advanced non-small cell lung cancer with unknown EGFR status

Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. However, EGFR mutation testing is not attainable in approximately 20% of patients. The current study examined intercalating and maintaining gefitinib treatment in stage IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC, never or former light smoking patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. Briefly, 219 patients who achieved stable disease (SD) with gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2) plus carboplatin (5 AUC) were randomized at 1:1 ratio to continue chemotherapy (n = 110) or intercalating gefitinib (250 mg/day on days 15–25 of each cycle until disease progress (n = 109). Progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.7 vs. 4.2 month in the gefitinib vs. control arm (HR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.31–0.56; P < 0.001). Overall survival (OS) was also longer in the gefitinib arm (20.1 vs. 15.4 months; HR: 0.68; 95% CI 0.48–0.97; P = 0.0323). Adverse events, including diarrhea, dermal reaction and thrombocytopenia, were more common in the gefitinib arm. In conclusion, intercalating and maintenance gefitinib treatment is a viable option for advanced NSCLC patients with unknown EGFR mutation status in subpopulations with high EFGR mutation rate.

Phase III study of gefitinib or pemetrexed with carboplatin in EGFR-mutated advanced lung adenocarcinoma

ObjectiveOral tyrosine kinase inhibitor has been shown to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in epidermal growthfactor receptor (EGFR) mutation positive adenocarcinoma; however, the comparator arm has not included the current standard adenocarcinoma regimen (pemetrexed carboplatin induction followed by maintenance pemetrexed) and patients from Indian subcontinent. Hence, this study was carried out in Indian patients to compare gefitinib with the above-mentioned chemotherapy regimen.MethodsThis was an open-labelled, randomised, parallel group study comparing gefitinib (250 mg orally daily) with pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under the curve 5) doublet intravenous induction chemotherapy regimen followed by maintenance pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) in patients with EGFR-activating mutation-positive stage IIIB or stage IV adenocarcinoma lung in the first-line setting. The primary endpoint for the study was PFS. 260 patients were required to demonstrate a 50% improvement in PFS of gefitinib over chemotherapy, with 80% power and 5% type 1 error. With an expected 5% dropout rate, the sample size was 290 patients.ResultsThe median PFS in gefitinib arm was 8.4 months (95% CI 6.3 to 10.5 months) compared with 5.6 months (95% CI 4.2 to 7.0 months) in pemetrexed–carboplatin arm (HR: 95% CI 0.513 to 0.851; p −0.001). The impact of gefitinib on PFS was seen across all subgroups.There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between the two arms. Haematologicalgrade3–4toxicities likeanaemia,neutropaenia and thrombocytopaenia were common in the pemetrexed–carboplatin arm while grade3–4 acneiform rash and diarrhoeawere common in the gefitinib arm.ConclusionThe study confirms the superiority of gefitinib in prolonging PFS against the most active chemotherapy regimen of pemetrexed–carboplatin followed by maintenance pemetrexed in EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma. The median PFS in Indian patients in gefitinib arm is similar to that reported in east Asians and Caucasians.

Retrospective analysis of survival in patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis from lung adenocarcinoma treated with erlotinib and gefitinib.

Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is a relatively rare metastatic form of non-small cell lung cancer, which can impact prognosis. There is an increasing need for selecting suitable epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors among those currently included in standard care for EGFR mutation-positive patients. We compared the efficacy of gefitinib and erlotinib in survival of patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis. The medical records of 269 patients who received tyrosine kinase inhibitors at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, 22 patients (8.2%) were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis from non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation between 2006 and 2016. Time to death from leptomeningeal carcinomatosis diagnosis was compared between the gefitinib and erlotinib groups. Gefitinib and erlotinib were administrated to 5 and 17 patients, respectively. Median progression-free survival was longer in the erlotinib group than in the gefitinib group (6.60 vs 2.12 months, P = 0.07). Overall survival was more than twice as long in the erlotinib arm compared with that in the gefitinib arm (7.20 vs 2.99 months, P = 0.32). Response in patients with exon 19 deletion was better than in those with exon 21 mutation (overall survival, 7.20 and 5.62 months, respectively, P = 0.12). Erlotinib seemed more effective than gefitinib in prolonging survival in leptomeningeal carcinomatosis from EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer and may be particularly beneficial in patients with EGFR exon 19 mutations, warranting further studies.