The Difference in Clinical Outcomes Between Osimertinib and Afatinib for First-Line Treatment in Patients with Advanced and Recurrent EGFR-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Taiwan

Clinical outcome analysis of different first‑ and second‑generation EGFR‑tyrosine kinase inhibitors in untreated patients with EGFR‑mutated non‑small cell lung cancer with baseline brain metastasis

Currently, the clinical outcomes of patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with baseline brain metastasis receiving first- and second-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are not clear. The present study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC with baseline brain metastasis who received first-line first- and second-generation EGFR-TKIs. In the present study, a retrospective analysis of clinical charts was performed to investigate first- and second-generation EGFR-TKIs in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC with baseline brain metastasis. Data from 197 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC with baseline brain metastasis who received first-line gefitinib, erlotinib or afatinib between May 2013 and January 2020 were retrieved from the Cancer Center database of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou for analysis. The systemic objective response rate and intracranial response rate to first-line EGFR-TKIs were 75.1 and 76.1%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line EGFR-TKIs, brain metastasis PFS (BMPFS) and overall survival (OS) of all the included patients were 13.07 [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.43-14.70], 24.63 (95% CI, 20.98-28.28) and 28.13 months (95% CI, 23.53-32.74), respectively. According to multivariate analysis, a greater number of brain metastases (>3) and the presence of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis (LMC) were independent predictors of a shorter PFS. Patients with a greater number of brain metastases or LMC also had markedly shorter BMPFS and OS than those with fewer brain metastases or no LMC. First- and second-generation EGFR-TKIs were effective for treating previously untreated patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC with baseline brain metastasis. In conclusion, for patients whose unfavorable factors [a greater number of brain metastases (>3) and LMCs] are associated with worse clinical outcomes, upfront osimertinib therapy, alone or in combination with other therapeutic strategies and procedures, should be considered.

Rebiopsy Enhances Survival with Afatinib vs. Osimertinib in EGFR Exon 19 Deletion Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Multicenter Study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Afatinib and Osimertinib are first-line treatments for EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but their comparative efficacies and the patient groups that benefit the most remain unclear. This multicenter retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of first-line Afatinib and Osimertinib in NSCLC patients with EGFR 19del and no brain metastases at diagnosis.

METHODS

The primary endpoints were time on treatment (ToT) and overall survival (OS). Survival analyses were performed for three groups: Afatinib followed by Osimertinib, Afatinib followed by other therapies, and Osimertinib (alone or followed by other therapies). Rebiopsy practices, including T790M mutation detection, were also analyzed in patients with disease progression on Afatinib.

RESULTS

Among 97 Afatinib-treated and 60 Osimertinib-treated patients, Osimertinib showed a significantly longer ToT (23.3 vs. 16.5 months; p = 0.007). Median OS was numerically higher for Afatinib with sequential Osimertinib (40.5 vs. 34.6 months for Osimertinib; p = 0.473). Osimertinib demonstrated advantages, with fewer brain metastases upon progression and fewer adverse effects. In the Afatinib group, 64% of patients with disease progression underwent rebiopsy, with 39% testing positive for T790M mutation and subsequently receiving Osimertinib. Rebiopsy was most frequently performed on the lung parenchyma using non-surgical methods.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, Osimertinib achieved a significantly longer ToT compared to Afatinib in NSCLC patients with EGFR 19del and no brain metastases. The sequential use of Afatinib followed by Osimertinib showed a trend toward improved OS, highlighting the importance of rebiopsy for identifying T790M mutations to guide subsequent therapy.

Optimal first-line treatment for EGFR-mutated NSCLC: a comparative analysis of osimertinib and second-generation EGFR-TKIs

BACKGROUND

Osimertinib is an irreversible third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). It is the preferred first-line treatment for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared to first-generation EGFR-TKIs. However, limited research has compared its clinical effectiveness with second-generation (2nd G) EGFR-TKIs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study recruited patients diagnosed with stage IIIb-IV EGFR-mutated NSCLC who received first-line treatment with either 2nd G EGFR-TKIs (afatinib and dacomitinib) or osimertinib between April 2020 and April 2023.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 168 patients, of whom 113 received 2nd G EGFR-TKIs (afatinib or dacomitinib) and 55 received osimertinib. The median progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ significantly between 2nd G EGFR-TKIs and osimertinib (del 19: 17.6 months; L858R: 20.0 months vs. 28.3 months, p = 0.081). In patients with the EGFR exon 19 deletion, osimertinib conferred a longer median PFS (28.3 vs. 17.6 months, p = 0.118) and time to treatment failure (30.2 vs. 22.7 months, p = 0.722) than 2nd G EGFR-TKIs. However, the differences were not statistically significant. In patients with with the EGFR exon 19 deletion and central nervous system metastasis, the median PFS did not differ significantly between those treated with osimertinib (14.3 months) and those treated with 2nd G EGFR-TKIs (17.6 months; p = 0.881). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the NSCLC stage was the only independent negative predictor of PFS. The treatment patterns in the second line also differed significantly between groups (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found comparable effectiveness between osimertinib and 2nd G EGFR-TKIs as first-line treatment for advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC, with only the NSCLC stage identified as a negative predictor of PFS. However, whether the different second-line treatments affect overall survival should be examined.

The difference between dacomitinib and afatinib in effectiveness and safety in first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world observational study

OBJECTIVES

The irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) afatinib and dacomitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and dacomitinib in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between September 2020 and March 2023, we retrospectively recruited patients diagnosed with advanced-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were treated with first-line irreversible EGFR-TKIs. The enrolled patients were assigned to two groups based on whether they received afatinib or dacomitinib.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients were enrolled in the study (70 to afatinib and 31 to dacomitinib). The partial response rates (PR) for first-line treatment with afatinib and dacomitinib were 85.7 and 80.6% (p = 0.522). The median progression-free survival (PFS) (18.9 vs. 16.3 months, p = 0.975) and time to treatment failure (TTF) (22.7 vs. 15.9 months, p = 0.324) in patients with afatinib and dacomitinib treatment were similar. There was no significant difference observed in the median PFS (16.1 vs. 18.9 months, p = 0.361) and TTF (32.5 vs. 19.6 months, p = 0.182) between patients receiving the standard dose and those receiving the reduced dose. In terms of side effects, the incidence of diarrhea was higher in the afatinib group (75.8% vs. 35.5%, p <  0.001), while the incidence of paronychia was higher in the dacomitinib group (58.1% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.004). The PFS (17.6 vs. 24.9 months, p = 0.663) and TTF (21.3 vs. 25.1 months, p = 0.152) were similar between patients younger than 75 years and those older than 75 years.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that afatinib and dacomitinib had similar effectiveness and safety profiles. However, they have slightly different side effects. Afatinib and dacomitinib can be safely administered to patients across different age groups with appropriate dose reductions.

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors for Lung Cancer and the Risk of Keratitis

Importance

Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRis) have been reported to be associated with cutaneous and ocular side effects; however, there is limited evidence of an association between EGFRi treatment and keratitis.

Objective

To determine the association between EGFRi treatment and agents and the risk of new-onset keratitis among patients with lung cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This US population-based cohort study examined TriNetX data of patients with lung cancer treated with or without EGFRis between May 1, 2003, and October 30, 2023.

Exposures

Treatment with EGFRis, including the first-generation agents gefitinib and erlotinib, the second-generation agent afatinib, and the third-generation agent osimertinib.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The risk of new-onset keratitis among patients with lung cancer receiving EGFRi treatment was determined using logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

Among 1 388 108 patients with lung cancer, 22 225 received EGFRis (mean [SD] age, 69.7 [10.6] years; 62.8% females and 37.2% males). Patients treated with EGFRis had a higher risk of keratitis than nonexposed patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.520; 95% CI, 1.339-1.725). Subtypes of EGFRi-associated keratitis included keratoconjunctivitis (HR, 1.367; 95% CI, 1.158-1.615), superficial keratitis (HR, 1.635; 95% CI, 1.306-2.047), and corneal ulcer (HR, 2.132; 95% CI, 1.515-3.002). Patients taking afatinib had a higher risk of keratitis (HR, 2.229; 95% CI, 1.480-3.356).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that patients with lung cancer treated with EGFRis may have an increased risk of new-onset keratitis, especially with the second-generation EGFRi afatinib, supporting the need for prompt diagnosis and management of EGFRi-associated ocular issues to prevent serious complications or treatment disruptions.

Measured Steps: Navigating the Path of Oligoprogressive Lung Cancer with Targeted and Immunotherapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses the definitions, treatment modalities, management, future directions, and ongoing clinical trials of oligoprogressive disease in oncogene-driven and non-oncogene-driven NSCLC.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the last decades, diagnostic and treatment modalities for oligometastatic NSCLC have advanced significantly, leading to improved survival. Additionally, our understanding of the tumor biology of oligoprogressive disease has expanded. However, despite the efforts of organizations, such as EORTC, ESTRO, and ASTRO proposing definitions for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive disease, heterogeneity in definitions persists in (ongoing) trials. Recognizing the significance of subclassification within oligoprogressive disease in NSCLC and the varying risks associated with subsequent metastatic spread, there is a call for tailored management strategies. A consensus on standardized criteria for the definition of oligoprogressive disease is urgently needed and will not only facilitate meaningful comparisons between studies but also pave the way for the development of personalized treatment plans that take into account the heterogeneous nature of oligoprogressive disease.

Treatment outcomes of non-small cell lung cancers treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: a real-world cohort study

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are a standard of care treatment options in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The present study investigated real-world EGFR TKI use and patient outcomes in NSCLC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We collected all the patients who had reimbursement for EGFR TKIs in Finland 2011-2020 and had data available at Finnish Cancer Registry. Survival and time-on-treatment (ToT) were analyzed from the first EGFR TKI purchase and patients were stratified according to the TKIs.

RESULTS

Whole patient cohort consisted of 1498 individuals who were treated with erlotinib (n = 998), afatinib (n = 258), or gefitinib (n = 238). In the EGFR mutant cohort (all gefitinib users and afatinib users with non-squamous histology; n = 466), survival was comparable to registrational trials while patients treated with afatinib had improved survival (HR 0.67 CI 95% 0.53-0.85) and longer ToT (13.9 vs 11.9 months, NS) compared to those treated with gefitinib. Females treated with afatinib had improved survival (HR 0.61 CI 95% 0.44-0.83) and longer ToT (15.1 vs 12.5 months, NS) compared to gefitinib while similar was not observed in males. Later line osimertinib treatment was applied for 78 patients. Approximately 20% of the individuals treated with previous gefitinib or afatinib had later line osimertinib treatment. Efficacy analysis of osimertinib treated showed similar ToT and survival regardless of the first line EGFR TKI.

CONCLUSIONS

EGFR mutants treated with afatinib have improved outcomes compared to gefitinib while later-line osimertinib was applied only for around 20% of the individuals. The study further highlights the good real-world performance of EGFR TKIs and sheds light on therapy sequencing.

First- versus Third-Generation EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in EGFR-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with Brain Metastases

Introduction: Up to 50% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbor EGFR alterations, the most common etiology behind brain metastases (BMs). First-generation EGFR-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKI) are limited by blood-brain barrier penetration and T790M tumor mutations, wherein third-generation EGFR-TKIs, like Osimertinib, have shown greater activity. However, their efficacy has not been well-studied in later therapy lines in NSCLC patients with BMs (NSCLC-BM). We sought to compare outcomes of NSCLC-BM treated with either first- or third-generation EGFR-TKIs in first-line and 2nd-to-5th-line settings. Methods: A retrospective review of NSCLC-BM patients diagnosed during 2010-2019 at Cleveland Clinic, Ohio, US, a quaternary-care center, was performed and reported following 'strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology' (STROBE) guidelines. Data regarding socio-demographic, histopathological, molecular characteristics, and clinical outcomes were collected. Primary outcomes were median overall survival (mOS) and progression-free survival (mPFS). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling and propensity score matching were utilized to adjust for confounders. Results: 239 NSCLC-BM patients with EGFR alterations were identified, of which 107 received EGFR-TKIs after diagnosis of BMs. 77.6% (83/107) received it as first-line treatment, and 30.8% (33/107) received it in later (2nd-5th) lines of therapy, with nine patients receiving it in both settings. 64 of 107 patients received first-generation (erlotinib/gefitinib) TKIs, with 53 receiving them in the first line setting and 13 receiving it in the 2nd-5th lines of therapy. 50 patients received Osimertinib as third-generation EGFR-TKI, 30 in first-line, and 20 in the 2nd-5th lines of therapy. Univariable analysis in first-line therapy demonstrated mOS of first- and third-generation EGFR-TKIs as 18.2 and 19.4 months, respectively (p = 0.57), while unadjusted mPFS of first- and third-generation EGFR-TKIs was 9.3 and 13.8 months, respectively (p = 0.14). In 2nd-5th line therapy, for first- and third-generation EGFR-TKIs, mOS was 17.3 and 11.9 months, (p = 0.19), while mPFS was 10.4 and 6.08 months, respectively (p = 0.41). After adjusting for age, performance status, presence of extracranial metastases, whole-brain radiotherapy, and presence of leptomeningeal metastases, hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 1.25 (95% CI 0.63-2.49, p = 0.52) for first-line therapy. Adjusted HR for mOS in 2nd-to-5th line therapy was 1.60 (95% CI 0.55-4.69, p = 0.39). Conclusions: No difference in survival was detected between first- and third-generation EGFR-TKIs in either first or 2nd-to-5th lines of therapy. Larger prospective studies are warranted reporting intracranial lesion size, EGFR alteration and expression levels in primary tumor and brain metastases, and response rates.