Gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutation: Review of the evidence

Gefitinib is a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Since 2004, it was clear that a substantial proportion of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) obtaining objective response when treated with gefitinib harbour activating mutations in the EGFR gene. Consequently, EGFR mutation has been widely studied, together with other molecular characteristics, as a potential predictive factor for gefitinib efficacy. As of August 2010, four East Asian randomized phase III trials comparing gefitinib to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) eligible for first-line treatment have been reported or published. Two of these trials were conducted without a molecular selection in patients with clinical characteristics (adenocarcinoma histology, never or light smoking) characterized by higher prevalence of EGFR mutation. In patients selected for the presence of tumor harbouring EGFR mutation, the administration of first-line gefitinib, as compared to standard chemotherapy, was associated with longer progression-free survival, higher objective response rate, a more favourable toxicity profile and better quality of life. The relevant improvement in progression-free survival with first-line administration of gefitinib has been confirmed in the other two randomized trials, dedicated to cases with EGFR mutation. In July 2009, European Medicines Agency granted marketing authorization for gefitinib for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with sensitizing mutations of the EGFR gene, across all lines of therapy. Gefitinib currently represents the best first-line treatment option for this molecularly selected subgroup of patients.

Gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with activating Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor mutation: implications for clinical practice and open issues

Randomized trials comparing gefitinib with chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with EGFR mutated advanced NSCLC support gefitinib as a new, highly effective treatment option in this setting. However, its use in clinical practice has several relevant implications and open issues. In order to choose the best treatment, a molecular characterization is now mandatory, as part of baseline diagnostic procedures. Every effort should be made in order to obtain sufficient tissue. If a clinical enrichment has to be performed for selecting patients to test for EGFR mutation, a reasonable proposal is to test all non-squamous tumors, and patients with squamous tumors only if never smokers. In patients with EGFR mutated tumor, one major issue is the decision about immediate use of gefitinib as first-line, or after failure of standard chemotherapy. First-line gefitinib, compared to chemotherapy, is associated with longer progression-free survival, higher response rate, better toxicity profile and quality of life, and its administration as first-line warrants that all patients have the chance of receiving an EGFR inhibitor. Evidence about the efficacy of erlotinib in the same setting will be soon available, however, at the moment, there are no direct comparisons between gefitinib and erlotinib in EGFR mutated patients. Treatment with gefitinib is usually well tolerated. Typical side effects in most cases are of mild to moderate intensity, and usually manageable with temporary interruption of treatment. When indicated gefitinib appears feasible also in special populations, like elderly or unfit patients, characterized by a significantly poorer risk/benefit ratio with standard chemotherapy. Personalized medicine for patients with lung cancer is now a reality, and patients with EGFR mutation should be treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in potentially resectable stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has become standard of treatment in the last years. Two randomised pioneer phase III trials conducted with second generation platinum combinations had demonstrated an advantage in survival of induction chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone. Subsequently, a wide number of phase II studies with third generation platinum-based doublets or triplets have increased the evidence of the activity as well as the good tolerability of this approach. Nowadays, the main topics of ongoing clinical research are to assess the role of induction chemotherapy in early stage disease, and the role of induction radiotherapy, as well as definite chemo-radiotherapy in stage IIIA NSCLC. This report review these issues and focuses on current treatment options for resectable stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC.

Stage III non small lung cancer (NSCLC): Docetaxel (D), gemcitabine (G), and cisplatin (C) as induction chemotherapy, an Italian phase I study

18201

Background: Based on the several clinical trials, combined modality therapy became the standard of care for patients with stage III NSCLC “unresectable” with good performance status (Kathy S. Albain, Educational Book ASCO 2006, 453–461; Thomas E. Stinchcombe, Oncologist 2006, 11, 809–823). The most effective induction chemotherapy has yet to be determined. The objective of this prospective phase I study was to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and to evaluate the activity and safety of one of the third generation triplets as a full dose neoadjuvant regimen in patients (pts) with unresectable Stage III NSCLC. Methods: In this study, chemotherapy-naïve pts with stage IIIA-N2 bulky and IIIB (except malignant pleural effusion) NSCLC were eligible. Inclusion into the trial and treatment decisions were done by multidisciplinary panel involving surgeons, medical oncologists and radiotherapists. All drugs were given intravenously on days 1 and 8, and repeated every 3 weeks up to 2 cycles followed by concurrent chemoradiation. D (30–35 mg/m2) was given first, followed by C (35 mg/m2) and G (1000 mg/m2). Results: From Jan ‘06 to Jul ‘06 twelve eligible pts were enrolled, 10/2 m/f gender; median age 63 (50–72), 1 patient with ECOG PS 0, 11 pts with PS 1; 5 pts with stage IIIA-N2 bulky, 7 pts with stage IIIB NSCLC; nine pts were smokers. All pts were evaluable for toxicity. Toxicity grade 3–4 by CTC criteria was: grade 3 neutropenia in 2/3 patients and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 1/3 patients on the second dose level of chemotherapy (i.e. docetaxel 35 mg/m2), and was considered dose-limiting. Of 9 pts treated at the MTD (i.e. docetaxel 30 mg/m2), only 1 patient developed grade 4 neutropenia and 1 patient grade 3 thrombocytopenia; 3 patients (30%) had grade 2 neutropenia and grade 2 stomatitis. Of 12 evaluable pts for response, after induction chemotherapy eighty-three percent of patients (9/12 pts) had an objective response and 16,6% (2/9 pts) stable disease. Phase II is continuing for larger patient accrual. Conclusions: The recommended doses for further phase II studies are D (30 mg/m2) followed by C (35 mg/m2) and G (1000 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. This regimen is well tolerated and effective, and appears to be an excellent choice for stage III NSCLC.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized phase II trial of two sequential schedules of docetaxel (D) and cisplatin (C) followed by gemcitabine (G) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

18154

Background: C based doublets remain the cornerstone for first line treatment of advanced NSCLC but the role of sequential use of chemotherapy is still investigational. Aim of this study was to assess the activity and toxicity of 3 courses of C and D followed by 3 courses of single agent G, to reduce C exposure and sequentially administer 2 second generation cytotoxic drugs. The weekly D/C schedule was further investigated, to reduce toxicity. Methods: Chemotherapy naive stage IIIB or IV measurable NSCLC pts, aged 18–70 and PS 0–1, were stratified by stage (IIIB vs IV) and randomized, after local ethic committee approval and signed informed consent, to D and C (both 75 mg/m2 on day 1) q21 days for 3 cycles (Arm A), or to D and C (both 25 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15) q28 days for 3 (Arm B). Responding or stable pts of each arm, were treated with 3 additional cycles of G (1,200 mg/m2 on days 1, 8) q 21 days. Primary endpoint of the study was response rate (RECIST). Sample size was calculated of 42 pts per arm, considering worthy of further investigation a regimen with =14 objective responses. Results: Between May 2005 and October 2006, 88 pts were enrolled (Arm A/B: 43/45), with 69 evaluable so far (median age 63 yrs, median PS 0, and M/F ratio 53/16). Toxicity (NCI-CTG criteria) after 3 cycles, evaluable on 67 (32/35) pts, was mainly hematological, with grade 3/4 neutropenia in 17 pts (17/0), neutropenic fever in 1 (arm A), infections in 2 (arm B), grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 3 (1/2) and grade 3/4 anemia in 2 (arm A). Non-hematological grade 3/4 toxicity consisted of fatigue (4/1), diarrhea (4/1), pulmonary toxicity (1/4), pain (2/3), stomatitis (1/2) and alopecia (2/0). Fifty one pts (A/B: 29/22) are evaluable for response after 3 cycles, with 16 PR (55%) and 7NC in arm A and 1CR+6PR (32%) and 7NC in arm B. Objective responses after 6 cycles, available only in few pts so far, show 1CR+10PR in arm A and 2PR in arm B. At a median FU of 6.5 months, 60/85 pts are alive (33/27) and 25 are dead (8/17), with 3 pts, never treated, lost to f. up. Conclusions: From these preliminary results, CD combination appears active and manageable while the activity of G, cannot be defined yet. Data collection is continuing and analysis will be completed and mature, by the time of the meeting.

[Table: see text]

Induction cisplatin-gemcitabine-paclitaxel plus concurrent radiotherapy and gemcitabine in the multimodality treatment of unresectable stage IIIB non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate feasibility and safety of induction three-drugs combination chemotherapy and concurrent radio-chemotherapy in stage IIIB NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage IIIB NSCLC were treated with three courses of induction chemotherapy, cisplatin 50 mg/m(2), paclitaxel 125 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1,8 of every 21 day cycle. Patients without distant progressive disease were then treated with radiotherapy and concurrent weekly gemcitabine (250 mg/m(2)). Toxicity and response of radio-chemotherapy treatment have been assessed.

RESULTS

Between Jan 01 and Nov 02, 46 patients were enrolled. Grade 3+ hematological and non-hematological toxicity during the induction phase were 41.3% and 13.1%, respectively. In 38 patients a Clinical Response or Stable Disease was recorded and these patients underwent to concurrent radio-chemotherapy. Grade 3+ hematological and non-hematological toxicities were 8.2% in this group. Further response was observed in 66% of patients. Overall median survival time was 17.8 months, with a 3-year survival rates of 23%.

CONCLUSION

Three-drugs induction chemotherapy and concurrent radio-chemotherapy with weekly gemcitabine in locally advanced stage IIIB NSCLC is feasible and safe.

A randomized phase II trial evaluating standard (50mg/min) versus low (10mg/min) infusion duration of gemcitabine as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who are not eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine is one of the most active drugs against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Preclinical data suggested that gemcitabine efficacy could be improved by increasing the dose or by increasing the infusion duration. This study has been designed in order to explore two different approaches of gemcitabine dose intensification in patients with advanced NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 121 chemonaive patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC not suitable for a platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly allocated to chemotherapy with gemcitabine 1500 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks by standard 30 min intravenous infusion (arm A), or gemcitabine 10 mg/m2/min for 150 min on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks by intravenous infusion at fixed dose rate (arm B).

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen patients were fully analyzed. No difference in response rate (16.1% versus 9.9%, p=0.28), median time to disease progression (4 months versus 4.5 months, p=0.34) median survival (9.8 months in both arms), and 1-year survival (42.6% versus 39.0% p=0.98) was detected in arms A and B, respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Main hematological toxicities were grade 3-4 neutropenia observed in 17.9% of patients in group A and in 49.2% of individuals in group B (p=0.0002). The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 3.3% in arm A and 0% in arm B (p=0.17). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more frequently observed in arm B patients (9.9% versus 1.8%, p=0.057). Non-hematological toxicity was similar in both arms, and consisted in grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity observed in 48.2% of patients in arm A and 41.0% in arm B.

CONCLUSION

Intensification of standard doses or prolonged infusion schedule did not result in efficacy improvement. Gemcitabine infusion duration does not warrant further investigation in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Second-line chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Despite being considered a standard of care, administration of second-line chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer is limited to patients in good performance status (ECOG PS 0-1) and to selected patients with PS 2. Drugs currently approved by FDA in this setting are docetaxel, gefitinib, erlotinib and pemetrexed, while in Europe those registered with this indication are only docetaxel and pemetrexed. This short review will focus on the role of pemetrexed, from the controlled phase II trial, to the development of the vitamin supplementation strategy to decrease toxicity, to the large phase III registration trial undertaken vs. the standard docetaxel. Moreover, the huge patient material collected during this latter trial has lead to further analyses to clarify several aspects of second-line treatment, from toxicity to quality of life assessment, to its role in elderly patients and to the direct translation in terms of costs. Finally, we will give a brief overview on current trials, that mainly explore the possibility to raise pemetrexed dose, and thus to increase its activity while maintaining an acceptable toxicity.

Correlation between anemia and functional/cognitive capacity in elderly lung cancer patients treated with chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Elderly cancer patients are often excluded from clinical trials and no data are available on the impact of chemotherapy-related anemia on their functional status and cognitive functions. This observational study investigates the association between hemoglobin (Hb) level and comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) variables (MMSE, ADL/IADL, GDS, CIRS and VAS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We enrolled 42 consecutive lung cancer elderly patients undergoing chemotherapy that were evaluated at baseline and after each CT cycle at least until cycle 2. Hb association with CGA indexes was expressed using Spearman's non-parametric coefficient r.

RESULTS

Higher Hb values were significantly associated with more favourable values of all indexes measuring mental and functional capacity, depression and comorbidities. For all indexes except IADL, improvements from baseline were significantly related with concomitant Hb increases. In 14 patients given erythropoietin during the first two cycles, mean Hb increased from 9.2 to 10.8 g/dl, and the mean values of all CGA indexes were improved. On the contrary, in 18 patients not given erythropoietin, Hb varied from 13.0 to 11.2 g/dl and a parallel worsening in all CGA indexes was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy-related anemia is associated with impairment of functional status and cognitive functions. In elderly cancer patients anemia correction or maintenance could be useful to preserve functional independency and protect from mental decay. However, the study results need to be confirmed on a larger series of patients within a controlled clinical trial.

Phase II study of gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

This phase II study evaluated the response rate and tolerability of gemcitabine–oxaliplatin chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1000 mg m⁻² on days 1 and 8, followed by oxaliplatin 130 mg m⁻² on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 21 days for up to six cycles. From February 2002 to May 2004, 60 patients were enrolled into the study in seven Italian institutions. We observed one complete response (1.7%) and 14 partial responses (23.3%), for an overall response rate of 25.0% (95% confidence interval, 14.7–37.9%). The median duration of response was 5.9 months (range 1.5–17.1 months). With a median follow-up of 6.7 months, median time to progressive disease and overall survival were 2.7 (range 1.9–3.4 months) and 7.3 months (range 7.2–8.6 months), respectively. The main grade 3–4 haematological toxicities were transient neutropenia in 11.7% and thrombocytopenia in 8.3% of the patients. Nausea/vomiting was the main grade 3–4 nonhaematological toxicity, occurring in 10.0% of the patients. Two (3.3%) patients developed grade 3 neurotoxicity. Our results show that gemcitabine–oxaliplatin chemotherapy is active and well tolerated in patients with advanced NSCLC, deserving further study, especially for patients not eligible to receive cisplatin.