Search

Purpose: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in EGFR-mutated lung cancer is limited by acquired resistance. In half of the patients treated with first/second-generation (1st/2nd gen) TKI, resistance is associated with EGFR p.T790M mutation. Sequential treatment with osimertinib is highly active in such patients. Currently, there is no approved targeted second-line option for patients receiving first-line osimertinib, which thus may not be the best choice for all patients. The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of a sequential TKI treatment with 1st/2nd gen TKI, followed by osimertinib in a real-world setting. Methods: Patients with EGFR-mutated lung cancer treated at two major comprehensive cancer centers were retrospectively analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier method and log rank test. Results: A cohort of 150 patients, of which 133 received first-line treatment with a first/second gen EGFR TKI, and 17 received first-line osimertinib, was included. Median age was 63.9 years, 55% had ECOG performance score of ≥ 1. First-line osimertinib was associated with prolonged progression-free survival (P = 0.038). Since the approval of osimertinib (February 2016), 91 patients were under treatment with a 1st/2nd gen TKI. Median overall survival (OS) of this cohort was 39.3 months. At data cutoff, 87% had progressed. Of those, 92% underwent new biomarker analyses, revealing EGFR p.T790M in 51%. Overall, 91% of progressing patients received second-line therapy, which was osimertinib in 46%. Median OS with sequenced osimertinib was 50 months. Median OS of patients with p.T790M-negative progression was 23.4 months. Conclusion: Real-world survival outcomes of patients with EGFR-mutated lung cancer may be superior with a sequenced TKI strategy. Predictors of p.T790M-associated resistance are needed to personalize first-line treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information on the epidemiology of uncommon EGFR mutations including exon 20 insertions amongst non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is lacking. Objective: The objective of this pragmatic literature review (PLR) and meta-analysis was to generate robust prevalence and incidence estimates based on ranges of exon 20 insertion mutations reported in the literature. Materials and methods: Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, congresses and reference lists for articles published from 2013 in key European countries of interest (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom) were performed. Articles were reviewed against pre-specified criteria and their quality was appraised using a published checklist. Prevalence estimates were synthesised by random-effects meta-analyses. Results: Eighty unique studies of moderate-to-high quality were included in the PLR. The meta-analysed prevalence for EGFR mutations was 12.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.0, 14.1) in any stage NSCLC and 14.8% (12.8, 17.1) in advanced/metastatic NSCLC. The prevalence of exon 20 insertions was 0.7% (0.4, 1.1) in any stage NSCLC and 6.1% (4.0, 9.4) in any stage EGFR-positive NSCLC. Mutation status was primarily measured using direct sequencing or a combination of methods. One study reporting exon 20 insertions in advanced/metastatic disease was identified, which reported a prevalence of 0.5% in overall NSCLC and 4.0% in EGFR-positive NSCLC. Conclusions: EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations are rare in NSCLC. There is a high unmet need in patients with exon 20 insertions, including effective therapies. Prospective cohort studies are needed to better clinically characterise these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preclinical studies demonstrate synergism between cancer immunotherapy and local radiation, enhancing anti-tumor effects and promoting immune responses. BI1361849 (CV9202) is an active cancer immunotherapeutic comprising protamine-formulated, sequence-optimized mRNA encoding six non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-associated antigens (NY-ESO-1, MAGE-C1, MAGE-C2, survivin, 5T4, and MUC-1), intended to induce targeted immune responses. Methods: We describe a phase Ib clinical trial evaluating treatment with BI1361849 combined with local radiation in 26 stage IV NSCLC patients with partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) after standard first-line therapy. Patients were stratified into three strata (1: non-squamous NSCLC, no epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation, PR/SD after ≥4 cycles of platinum- and pemetrexed-based treatment [n = 16]; 2: squamous NSCLC, PR/SD after ≥4 cycles of platinum-based and non-platinum compound treatment [n = 8]; 3: non-squamous NSCLC, EGFR mutation, PR/SD after ≥3 and ≤ 6 months EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment [n = 2]). Patients received intradermal BI1361849, local radiation (4 x 5 Gy), then BI1361849 until disease progression. Strata 1 and 3 also had maintenance pemetrexed or continued EGFR-TKI therapy, respectively. The primary endpoint was evaluation of safety; secondary objectives included assessment of clinical efficacy (every 6 weeks during treatment) and of immune response (on Days 1 [baseline], 19 and 61). Results: Study treatment was well tolerated; injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms were the most common BI1361849-related adverse events. Three patients had grade 3 BI1361849-related adverse events (fatigue, pyrexia); there was one grade 3 radiation-related event (dysphagia). In comparison to baseline, immunomonitoring revealed increased BI1361849 antigen-specific immune responses in the majority of patients (84%), whereby antigen-specific antibody levels were increased in 80% and functional T cells in 40% of patients, and involvement of multiple antigen specificities was evident in 52% of patients. One patient had a partial response in combination with pemetrexed maintenance, and 46.2% achieved stable disease as best overall response. Best overall response was SD in 57.7% for target lesions. Conclusion: The results support further investigation of mRNA-based immunotherapy in NSCLC including combinations with immune checkpoint inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Background We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, randomised, phase 3 trials. Methods Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 3] or gemcitabine-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 6]), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393 . Findings Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35–44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31–37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28·2 months (95% CI 24·6–33·6) in the afatinib group and 28·2 months (20·7–33·2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·66–1·17, p=0·39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23·1 months (95% CI 20·4–27·3) in the afatinib group and 23·5 months (18·0–25·6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·72–1·22, p=0·61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33·3 months (95% CI 26·8–41·5) in the afatinib group versus 21·1 months (16·3–30·7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·36–0·79, p=0·0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31·4 months (95% CI 24·2–35·3) versus 18·4 months (14·6–25·6), respectively (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·44–0·94, p=0·023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27·6 months (19·8–41·7) in the afatinib group versus 40·3 months (24·3–not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1·30, 95% CI 0·80–2·11, p=0·29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19·6 months (95% CI 17·0–22·1) versus 24·3 months (19·0–27·0), respectively (HR 1·22, 95% CI 0·81–1·83, p=0·34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3–4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 [16%] of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 [15%] of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 [14%] and 13 [5%]), paronychia (26 [11%] in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5%] in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 [18%] of 111 patients), fatigue (14 [13%]) and leucopenia (nine [8%]) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 [27%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19%]), and leucopenia (17 [15%]). Interpretation Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials. Funding Boehringer Inge [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]