Correlation between the qualification for bevacizumab use and the survival of patients with non-small cell lung cancer harboring the epidermal growth factor receptor mutation: a retrospective analysis

Randomized Phase 2 Study of Osimertinib Plus Bevacizumab Versus Osimertinib for Untreated Patients With Nonsquamous NSCLC Harboring EGFR Mutations: WJOG9717L Study

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab for previously untreated patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC harboring EGFR-sensitizing mutations.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 2 study at 21 institutions in Japan. Previously untreated patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC harboring EGFR-sensitizing mutations received either osimertinib (80 mg, daily) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg, every 3 wk) or osimertinib monotherapy, and were stratified according to sex, stage, and EGFR mutation status. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population, assessed by means of blinded, independent central radiologic review.

RESULTS

Between January 2018 and September 2018, a total of 122 patients were enrolled (osimertinib + bevacizumab arm, 61 patients; osimertinib monotherapy arm, 61 patients). At a median follow-up duration of 19.8 months, the median PFS was 22.1 months for osimertinib plus bevacizumab and 20.2 months for osimertinib monotherapy, with a hazard ratio of 0.862 (60% confidence interval: 0.700-1.060, 95% confidence interval: 0.531-1.397, one-sided stratified log-rank p = 0.213). Adverse events of grade 3 or worse were observed in 34 patients (56%) in the osimertinib plus bevacizumab arm and 29 (48%) in the osimertinib monotherapy arm. In addition, two (3%) and 11 patients (18%) experienced any grade pneumonitis, respectively, and grade 3 pneumonitis was observed in one patient (2%) in each arm.

CONCLUSIONS

This study failed to exhibit the efficacy of osimertinib plus bevacizumab for improving the PFS among patients with nonsquamous NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations as first-line treatment.

Impact of angiogenesis inhibitor eligibility on the prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR mutation

Background

Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR‐TKIs) are currently the primary treatment option for patients with EGFR‐mutant non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the effect of EGFR‐TKIs are eventually weakened due to resistance, and there is also a differential efficacy based on EGFR mutation subtypes. The combination of angiogenesis inhibitor (AI) with EGFR‐TKI has shown better efficacy than EGFR‐TKI monotherapy, regardless of the mutation subtypes. Nevertheless, the effect of AI eligibility on overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS) remains to be elucidated. Thus, we assessed this impact on patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR mutation.

Methods

In this study, the data for 450 patients with EGFR‐mutant NSCLC, who were treated with EGFR‐TKI monotherapy, were retrospectively analyzed for AI eligibility. The patients were categorized into AI‐eligible (AI fit) and ineligible groups (AI unfit).

Results

The median PFS of the AI fit group was 12.9 months, compared to 9.6 months in the unfit group (p = 0.007), and OS was also significantly longer in the AI fit group (median OS = 33.0 months) compared to that in the unfit group (18.5 months, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that AI ineligibility was associated with shorter PFS and poor prognosis. Also, in the AI fit group, there was no significant difference in the PFS between EGFR L858R mutation and EGFR exon 19 deletion (median PFS = 11.5 months vs. 13.8 months; p = 0.17).

Conclusions

From our study, AI eligibility resulted in longer OS and PFS, and also had different effects on patients with EGFR L858R and exon 19 deletion. Since this selection bias may have affected previous clinical trial data on the efficacy of AI combination therapy, their results should be carefully considered henceforth.

Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Angiogenesis plays an essential role in the development of most solid tumors by delivering nutrients and oxygen to the tumor. Therefore, anti-angiogenic therapy, particularly anti-VEGF and anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) therapy, has been a popular strategy to treat cancer. However, anti-angiogenic therapy does not significantly improve patients' outcomes when used alone because the cutdown of the vessels transforms tumor cells to a hypoxia-tolerant phenotype. While combining anti-angiogenic therapy with other therapies, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy, has a promising efficacy due to the vessel normalization effect induced by anti-angiogenic agents. Here, we review the characteristics of tumor angiogenesis, the mechanisms, clinical applications, and prospects of combining anti-angiogenic therapy with other therapies in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

Treatment with or without bevacizumab as a first-line and maintenance therapy for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed and bevacizumab as monotherapies, or in combination, have been approved for maintenance therapy following platinum-based induction in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The differences in the benefits of bevacizumab for treatment during early or late NSCLC have not yet been characterized.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 35 patients with advanced naïve NSCLC who had received pemetrexed/platinum with or without bevacizumab followed by maintenance therapy with pemetrexed alone or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab. The data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression adjusted for risk factors. Patients were grouped according to treatment conditions. Group A received pemetrexed plus platinum followed by pemetrexed alone (Pem-Pt/Pem). Group B received pemetrexed plus platinum followed by pemetrexed and bevacizumab (Group B; Pem-Pt/Pem + Bev). Group C received pemetrexed, platinum, and bevacizumab during induction therapy, and pemetrexed as maintenance therapy (Group C; Pem-Pt + Bev/Pem + Bev). We assessed the significance of introduction of bevacizumab at different stages of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 13 (37.1%) patients were included in Group A, nine patients (25.7%) were included in Group B, and 13 patients (37.1%) were included in Group C. Among the 35 patients, 69.2% were male, and the median age was 59 years (range 40-75). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.7 months (231 days, range 134-410 days) in Group A, 9.3 months (280 days, range 84-565 days) in Group B, and 8.0 months (241 days, range 108-665 days) in Group C. The median PFS was not significantly different among the three groups (P = 0.233). Similarly, bevacizumab did not significantly affect PFS (P = 0.630).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of bevacizumab into induction chemotherapy or maintenance therapy provided limited benefits to PFS in our study, but previous studies suggested that bevacizumab may improve disease control. In that way, we presume that early use of bevacizumab may provide a greater benefit.

Potential Antiangiogenic Treatment Eligibility of Patients with Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: EPISQUAMAB Study (GFPC 2015-01)

BACKGROUND

Antiangiogenic agents have improved the prognosis of non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), even though all the patients are not eligible to receive them because of counterindications linked to the tumor's characteristics or comorbidities. Much less information is available about the eligibility of patients with squamous non-small-cell lung cancers (SQ-NSCLCs) to receive antivascular endothelial growth-factor (VEGF) treatments, even though such molecules are being developed for this histology. This study was undertaken to determine the percentage of advanced SQ-NSCLC patients who would be eligible to receive an antiVEGF agent as second-line systemic therapy.

METHODS

This observational, multicenter, prospective study evaluated advanced SQ-NSCLC patients' criteria for ineligibility to receive an antiVEGF during a multidisciplinary meeting to choose their standard second-line systemic therapy.

RESULTS

Among the 317 patients included, 53.6% had at least one ineligibility criterion, and ~20% had at least two, with disease extension to large vessels (39.8%), tumor cavitation (20.5%), cardiovascular disease (11%) and/or hemoptysis (7.2%) being the most frequent. Patients with an ECOG performance score of 1/2 had more cardiovascular contraindications that those with scores of 0.

CONCLUSION

Almost half of the SQ-NSCLC patients included in this study would have been eligible to receive an antiVEGF agent. The development of these molecules for these indications should be encouraged.