A randomised phase II study of pemetrexed versus pemetrexed+erlotinib as second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies

In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted.

Personal Neoantigens From Patients With NSCLC Induce Efficient Antitumor Responses

Objective

To develop a neoantigen-targeted personalized cancer treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), neoantigens were obtained from collected human lung cancer samples, and the utility of neoantigen and neoantigen-reactive T cells (NRTs) was assessed.

Methods

Tumor specimens from three patients with NSCLC were obtained and analyzed by whole-exome sequencing, and neoantigens were predicted accordingly. Dendritic cells and T lymphocytes were isolated, NRTs were elicited and IFN-γ ELISPOT tests were conducted. HLA-A2.1/K^b transgenic mice were immunized with peptides from HLA-A*02:01⁺patient with high immunogenicity, and NRTs were subjected to IFN-γ, IL-2 and TNF-α ELISPOT as well as time-resolved fluorescence assay for cytotoxicity assays to verify the immunogenicity in vitro. The HLA-A*02:01⁺lung cancer cell line was transfected with minigene and inoculated into the flanks of C57BL/6^nu/nu mice and the NRTs induced by the immunogenic polypeptides from autologous HLA-A2.1/K^b transgenic mice were adoptively transfused to verify their immunogenicity in vivo.

Results

Multiple putative mutation-associated neoantigens with strong affinity for HLA were selected from each patient. Immunogenic neoantigen were identified in all three NSCLC patients, the potency of ACAD8-T105I, BCAR1-G23V and PLCG1-M425L as effective neoantigen to active T cells in suppressing tumor growth was further proven both in vitro and in vivo using HLA-A2.1/Kb transgenic mice and tumor-bearing mouse models.

Conclusion

Neoantigens with strong immunogenicity can be screened from NSCLC patients through the whole-exome sequencing of patient specimens and machine-learning-based neoantigen predictions. NRTs shown efficient antitumor responses in transgenic mice and tumor-bearing mouse models. Our results indicate that the development of neoantigen-based personalized immunotherapies in NSCLC is possible.

Precis

Neoantigens with strong immunogenicity were screened from NSCLC patients. This research provides evidence suggesting that neoantigen-based therapy might serve as feasible treatment for NSCLC.

Tumor shrinkage rate as a potential marker for the prediction of long-term outcome in advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Context

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) play an indispensable role in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), leading to a survival major breakthrough, but there remains no uniform standard for predicting the efficacy of TKI therapy.

Aims

We retrospectively reviewed the use of EGFR-TKIs for advanced NSCLC between January 2009 and December 2017 in a hospital, which 169 patients who treated with first-line TKIs were enrolled.

Subjects and Methods

Multiple clinical factors, including histology, age, and sex, were analyzed. We calculated the tumor shrinkage rate (TSR) by measuring the longest diameters of the main mass by computed tomography (CT) before TKI therapy and the first CT after TKI therapy. We evaluated overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after first-line TKI therapy, and we assessed factors predicting survival using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Eligible patients were sorted into higher (n = 83) and lower (n = 86) TSR groups according to the mean TSR of 0.49%. The 83 patients with a higher TSR had longer PFS and OS than those in the 86 patients with a lower TSR (14.83 vs. 8.40 months, P < 0.001, and 31.03 vs. 20.10 months, P < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analyses revealed that TSR was an independent predictor of PFS and OS (PFS hazard ratio [HR]: 0.506, P < 0.001, and OS HR: 0.291, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

These cumulative data support that TSR may be an early predictor of the treatment efficacy in NSCLC with EGFR mutations treated with first-line TKIs.

Assessment of proportional hazard assumption in aggregate data: a systematic review on statistical methodology in clinical trials using time-to-event endpoint

Background

The evaluation of the proportional hazards (PH) assumption in survival analysis is an important issue when Hazard Ratio (HR) is chosen as summary measure. The aim is to assess the appropriateness of statistical methods based on the PH assumption in oncological trials.

Methods

We selected 58 randomised controlled trials comparing at least two pharmacological treatments with a time-to-event as primary endpoint in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Data from Kaplan–Meier curves were used to calculate the relative hazard at each time point and the Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST). The PH assumption was assessed with a fixed-effect meta-regression.

Results

In 19% of the trials, there was evidence of non-PH. Comparison of treatments with different mechanisms of action was associated (P = 0.006) with violation of the PH assumption. In all the superiority trials where non-PH was detected, the conclusions using the RMST corresponded to that based on the Cox model, although the magnitude of the effect given by the HR was systematically greater than the one from the RMST ratio.

Conclusion

As drugs with new mechanisms of action are being increasingly employed, particular attention should be paid on the statistical methods used to compare different types of agents.

A phase I study to assess afatinib in combination with carboplatin or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors

PURPOSE

Afatinib, an irreversible ErbB family blocker, has demonstrated preclinical antitumor activity with chemotherapy.

METHODS

As part of a phase I trial in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT00809133; 3 + 3 dose-escalation design), we determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of afatinib with carboplatin (A/C) or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel (A/C/P). Starting doses: afatinib 20 mg/day, carboplatin AUC6 (A/C) with paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (A/C/P) (chemotherapy: Day 1 of 21-day cycles). The primary objective was to determine the MTDs; safety, pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients received A/C (n = 12) or A/C/P (n = 26). No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported with A(20 mg)/C(AUC6). One patient experienced DLT in the A(40 mg)/C(AUC6) cohort (grade 3 acneiform rash); A(40 mg)/C(AUC6) was determined as the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for A/C. Two patients each had DLTs with A(20 mg/day)/C(AUC6)/P(175 mg/m2): fatigue, infection, diarrhea, small intestine hemorrhage, dehydration, renal impairment, neutropenic sepsis (n = 1), mucositis (n = 1); A(40 mg)/C(AUC5)/P(175 mg/m2): febrile neutropenia (n = 1), mucositis, fatigue (n = 1); and A(30 mg)/C(AUC5)/P(175 mg/m2): stomatitis (n = 1), mucositis (n = 1). No DLT was observed with A(20 mg)/C(AUC5)/P(175 mg/m2), determined as the RP2D for A/C/P. The most frequent drug-related adverse events were (A/C; A/C/P): rash (75%; 73%), fatigue (67%; 69%), and diarrhea (58%; 88%). Drug plasma concentrations were similar between cycles, suggesting no drug-drug interactions. Objective response rates in these heavily pretreated patients were A/C, 3/12 (25%); A/C/P, 5/26 (19%).

CONCLUSIONS

Afatinib 40 mg/day (approved monotherapy dose) with carboplatin AUC6, and afatinib 20 mg/day with carboplatin AUC5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 demonstrated manageable safety and antitumor activity. Afatinib > 20 mg/day in the triple combination was not well tolerated.

Combined therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have a pronounced clinical benefit for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) positive for EGFR activating mutations. Such individuals inevitably develop resistance to these drugs, however, new treatment strategies to overcome such resistance are being actively pursued. The clinical benefit of EGFR-TKIs for patients with locally advanced NSCLC remains to be clarified. Areas covered: This review summarizes the recent progress in combination treatment with EGFR-TKIs and either chemotherapy or radiotherapy for patients with NSCLC positive for EGFR activating mutations. Expert commentary: Combination therapy with EGFR-TKIs and various other treatment options are under investigation in clinical studies. Although early studies failed to show a clinical benefit for such combination therapy because of a lack of patient selection, clinical studies with patient selection based on EGFR mutation status have shown promising results. Such combination therapy might eventually replace the current standard treatment for patients with NSCLC positive for EGFR activating mutations.

Efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The role of a combination of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) and chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been well established. To clarify this problem, we performed a meta-analysis with 15 studies identified from PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. We found that the combined regimen had a significant benefit on progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.71–0.90; P < 0.001) and the objective response rate (ORR) (RR = 1.35; 95% CI = 1.14–1.59; P < 0.001). However, the combined regimen had no significant impact on overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.90–1.03; P = 0.25). Subgroup analysis showed significantly higher OS advantages in EGFR mutation positive patients (P = 0.01), never smokers (P = 0.01), Asian patients (P = 0.02), patients receiving second-line treatment (P < 0.001), and those receiving a sequential combination of EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy (P = 0.005). The combination regimen showed a higher incidence of grade 3–4 toxicities (leucopenia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, rash, fatigue and diarrhea). In summary, the combination of EGFR-TKIs plus chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC achieved a significantly longer PFS and a higher ORR but not longer OS. Well-designed prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

A Review of Regimens Combining Pemetrexed With an Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor in the Treatment of Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Pemetrexed is a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations. Pemetrexed and EGFR TKIs have different mechanisms of action and minimally overlapping toxicity profiles; therefore, it is hypothesized that their combination might result in acceptable toxicity, provided that the synergistic antitumor activity observed in preclinical studies is achieved. This review summarizes clinical trials of pemetrexed in combination with an EGFR TKI for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous NSCLC in the first- and second-line settings, using intercalated, sequential, and concurrent treatment strategies. As would be expected, such strategies were most efficacious in patients with the activating EGFR mutations associated with response to an EGFR TKI. In the studies that compared a pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination with pemetrexed alone or the EGFR TKI alone, the pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination was more efficacious than the single-agent regimens. The pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations were generally associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events than the single-agent regimens; however, such toxicities were clinically manageable. Future studies of pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations should focus on optimizing treatment strategies in patients with activating EGFR mutations.

Combination of chemotherapy and gefitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and sensitive EGFR mutations: A randomized controlled trial

To explore the optimal treatment strategy for patients who harbor sensitive EGFR mutations, a head-to-head study was performed to compare chemotherapy and gefitinib in combination or with either agent alone as first-line therapy, in terms of efficacy and safety. A total of 121 untreated patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma who harbored sensitive EGFR mutations were randomly assigned to receive gefitinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin, pemetrexed plus carboplatin or gefitinib alone. The progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in the combination group (17.5 months, 95% CI, 15.3-19.7) was longer than that of patients in the chemotherapy group (5.7 months, 95% CI, 5.2-6.3) or gefitinib (11.9 months, 95% CI, 9.1-14.6) group. The (hazard ratios) HRs of PFS for the combination group vs. chemotherapy and gefitinib groups were 0.16 (95% CI, 0.09-0.29, p < 0.001) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.29-0.78, p = 0.003), respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) in the combination therapy group, chemotherapy group and the gefitinib group was 82.5%, 32.5% and 65.9%, respectively. The combinational strategy resulted in longer overall survival (OS) than chemotherapy (HR = 0.46, p = 0.016) or gefitinib (HR = 0.36, p = 0.001) alone. Our finding suggested that treatment with pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib could provide better survival benefits for patients with lung adenocarcinoma harboring sensitive EGFR mutations.

Second-Line Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: New Developments for Tumours Not Harbouring Targetable Oncogenic Driver Mutations

Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab is the standard of care for the initial management of advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without a targetable molecular abnormality. However, the majority of patients with NSCLC will ultimately develop resistance to initial platinum-based chemotherapy, and many remain candidates for subsequent lines of therapy. Randomised trials over the past 10-15 years have established pemetrexed (non-squamous histology), docetaxel, erlotinib and gefitinib as approved second-line agents in NSCLC without targetable driver mutations or rearrangements. Trials comparing these agents with other chemotherapy, evaluating the addition of an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) to chemotherapy or the addition of another targeted agent to erlotinib or gefitinib have all failed to demonstrate an improvement in overall survival for patients with NSCLC. In contrast, recent data comparing therapy with novel monoclonal antibodies against programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or PD ligand (PD-L1) pathway versus standard chemotherapy following platinum failure have demonstrated significant improvements in overall survival. Therapy with nivolumab or pembrolizumab would now be considered standard second-line therapy in patients without contraindication to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Atezolizumab also appears promising in this setting.

Erlotinib intercalating pemetrexed/cisplatin versus erlotinib alone in Chinese patients with brain metastases from lung adenocarcinoma: a prospective, non-randomised, concurrent controlled trial (NCT01578668)

Objective

Erlotinib has a synergistic effect with pemetrexed for treating non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. We investigated the efficacy and safety of erlotinib (E) in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin (E-P) in Chinese patients with lung adenocarcinoma with brain metastases.

Design

Patients who were erlotinib-naïve or pemetrexed-naïve were assigned in parallel to receive either E or E-P. The primary endpoint was the intracranial overall response rate (ORRi).

Results

Sixty-nine patients with lung adenocarcinoma with brain metastases received E (n=35) or E-P (n=34) from January 2012 to November 2014. Demographics and patient characteristics were well balanced between the two groups, including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status, sex, age, smoking status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, brain metastases and number of prior treatments. ORRi in the E-P arm was superior to that in the E arm (79% vs 48%, p=0.008). Compared with E as the first-line treatment, E-P was associated with better intracranial progression-free survival (PFSi, median: 9 vs 2 months, p=0.027) and systemic PFS (median: 8 vs 2 months, p=0.006). The most frequent E-related adverse events were higher in the combination arm. No new safety signals were detected. The side effects were tolerable, and there were no drug-related deaths.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that the E-P combination may be effective in Chinese patients with lung adenocarcinoma with brain metastases, with improved PFS in treatment-naïve patients. Toxicities are tolerable, and there are more E-related side effects.

Chemotherapy (platinum and pemetrexed) in combination with erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer induces major gastrointestinal toxicity: two case reports from the FLARE/GFPC 03-2013 study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

A randomized phase III study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of second-line platinum-based chemotherapy with or without erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR-activating mutation after secondary resistance to EGFR-TKIs (epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors).

CASE SUMMARY

We report herein two of the first three patients who presented with major gastrointestinal toxicities in the experimental arm of the trial.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Pending further data, it would seem safer to administer EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy sequentially rather than concomitantly.

Pemetrexed for advanced stage nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer: latest evidence about its extended use and outcomes

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still the leading cause of cancer-related death, and the treatment of advanced NSCLC relies on systemic treatments. During the last decade, pemetrexed, an antifolate agent, gradually became a key component of the treatment for patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. It has indeed been shown to be efficient for first-line, maintenance and second- or third-line treatment in this subgroup of NSCLC. Moreover, it is usually well tolerated, with few grade 3 and 4 toxicities. Several studies have tried to identify predictive biomarkers of pemetrexed efficacy. Due to pemetrexed's mechanism of action, thymidilate synthase expression predictive value was investigated but could not be demonstrated. Currently, more than 400 trials of pemetrexed for the treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC are ongoing.

Meta-analysis of seven randomized control trials to assess the efficacy and toxicity of combining EGFR-TKI with chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC who failed first-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Some recent clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate a combination of EGFR- TKI with chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients as second-line therapy, but the results on the efficacy of such trials are inconsistent. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination of EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC who failed first-line treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched relative trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ASCO Abstracts, ESMO Abstracts, Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials.gov. Outcomes analyzed were overall response rate (ORR), progression- free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and major toxicity.

RESULTS

Seven trails eventually were included in this meta-analysis, covering 1,168 patients. The results showed that the combined regimen arm had a significant higher ORR (RR 1.76 [1.16, 2.66], p=0.007) and longer PFS (HR 0.75 [0.66-0.85], p<0.00001), but failed to show effects on OS (HR 0.88 [0.68- 1.15], p=0.36). In terms of subgroup results, continuation of EGFR-TKI in addition to chemotherapy after first-line EGFR-TKI resistance confered no improvement in ORR (RR 0.95 [0.68, 1.33], p=0.75) and PFS (HR 0.89[0.69, 1.15], p=0.38), and OS was even shorter (HR1.52 [1.05- 2.21], p=0.03). However, combination therapy with EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy after failure of first-line chemotherapy significantly improved the ORR (RR 2.06 [1.42, 2.99], p=0.0002), PFS (HR 0.71 [0.61, 0.82], p<0.00001) and OS (HR 0.74 [0.62- 0.88], p=0.0008), clinical benefit being restricted to combining EGFR-TKI with pemetrexed, but not docetaxel. Grade 3-4 toxicity was found at significantly higher incidence in the combined regimen arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuation of EGFR-TKI in addition to chemotherapy after first-line EGFR-TKI resistance should be avoided. Combination therapy of EGFR-TKI and pemetrexed for advanced NSCLC should be further investigated for prognostic and predictive factors to find the group with the highest benefit of the combination strategy.

Second-line combination therapies in nonsmall cell lung cancer without known driver mutations

In advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, platinum-based combination chemotherapy is standard treatment in the first-line setting; however, the large majority of patients ultimately progress. For more than a decade, single-agent therapy with docetaxel, pemetrexed or erlotinib has been the standard of care after failure with platinum salts, showing some benefit over best supportive care. Nonetheless, prognosis remains poor and new second-line strategies are urgently needed. Combinations of cytotoxic agents, including rechallenge with platinum salts, do not offer clear benefit over single-agent therapy for the majority of patients. In patients without a known tumoural oncogenic driver mutation, regimens based on combinations of targeted agents have shown promising results; however, a clear role in therapeutic management is yet to be established. Some success has been reported in recent research combining a cytotoxic agent with targeted therapies.In this review, we summarise published data for the various strategies evaluated over the past decade in second-line treatment of NSCLC patients without a known driver mutation. We focus on combination treatments and consider future perspectives, including the need to identify predictive markers to support personalised therapeutic strategies.

A Randomized, Open-Label Phase II Trial of Volasertib as Monotherapy and in Combination With Standard-Dose Pemetrexed Compared With Pemetrexed Monotherapy in Second-Line Treatment for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Second-line therapy options that improve survival for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are needed. This randomized, phase II trial (n [ 143) investigated volasertib monotherapy or in combination with pemetrexed compared with pemetrexed monotherapy in patients with NSCLC whose disease had progressed after previous platinum-based chemotherapy. The combination of volasertib with pemetrexed did not improve efficacy compared with pemetrexed monotherapy.

INTRODUCTION

Volasertib is a potent, selective, cell cycle kinase inhibitor that induces mitotic arrest and apoptosis by targeting Polo-like kinase. In this study we compared volasertib, volasertib with pemetrexed, and pemetrexed alone in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A run-in phase (n = 12) was used to determine whether volasertib could be combined in full dose with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2). Subsequent patients were randomized to volasertib (n = 37), volasertib with pemetrexed (n = 47), or pemetrexed (n = 47) administered on day 1 every 21 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included objective response rate and pharmacokinetics.

RESULTS

Volasertib 300 mg was chosen for the randomized phase. Recruitment to single-agent volasertib was stopped early because of lack of efficacy. Median PFS was 5.3 months with pemetrexed compared with 3.3 months with volasertib with pemetrexed (hazard ratio [HR], 1.141; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.771) and 1.4 months with volasertib (HR, 2.045; 95% CI, 1.27-3.292). ORRs were 10.6% with pemetrexed, 21.3% for volasertib with pemetrexed, and 8.1% with volasertib. The most common all-grade related adverse events (pemetrexed/volasertib with pemetrexed/volasertib) were: fatigue (28 [61%]/27 [59%]/11 [31%]), nausea (21 [46%]/19 [41%]/0 [0%]), decreased apetite (14 [31%]/13 [28%]/2 [6%]), neutropenia (4 [9%]/8 [17%]/9 [25%]), rash (9 [20%]/8 [17%]/2 [6%]), vomiting (6 [13%]/13 [28%]/0 [0%]), and diarrhea (8 [17%]/11 [24%]/0 [0%]). Pharmacokinetics analyses showed no drug-drug interactions between volasertib and pemetrexed.

CONCLUSION

For treatment in the second-line for advanced or metastatic NSCLC, the combination of volasertib with standard pemetrexed did not increase toxicity significantly but also did not improve efficacy compared with single-agent pemetrexed.

Pemetrexed With Platinum Combination as a Backbone for Targeted Therapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Standard platinum-based chemotherapy combinations for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have reached a plateau in terms of the survival benefit they offer for patients. In addition, the emerging clinical trend of tailored treatment based on patient characteristics has led to the development of therapeutic strategies that target specific cancer-related molecular pathways, including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), angiogenesis, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors. Current research is focused on combining targeted therapy with platinum-based chemotherapy in an endeavor to achieve an additional benefit in specific patient populations. Currently, pemetrexed is indicated for use in the first-line, maintenance, and second-line settings for the treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC. The combination of pemetrexed and cisplatin is well tolerated and is the approved standard first-line therapy. Thus, the pemetrexed-platinum backbone provides an attractive option for combination with targeted therapies. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge and future prospects of the use of pemetrexed-platinum as a backbone for combination with targeted therapies for NSCLC.

The efficacy and safety of pemetrexed-based doublet therapy compared to pemetrexed alone for the second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an updated meta-analysis

Background

Pemetrexed is currently recommended as the second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it is unclear whether pemetrexed-based doublet therapy improves treatment efficacy and safety. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to resolve this controversial question.

Methods

Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles before April 2015. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and odds ratios (ORs) were used to analyze the overall response rate (ORR) and grade ≥3 toxicities. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were also evaluated.

Results

A total of 2,519 patients from ten randomized controlled trials were included. Compared to pemetrexed alone, PFS and ORR significantly improved in the pemetrexed-based doublet group (HR, 0.86; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.75–0.99; P=0.038; and OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.25–3.12; P=0.003, respectively). However, no statistically significant differences in OS were observed between groups (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.83–1.02; P=0.132). In addition, subgroup analyses indicated that improved OS was only observed in nonsquamous NSCLC patients who received the combination of pemetrexed and erlotinib. An increasing incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was observed in the pemetrexed-based doublet group.

Conclusion

Among patients with advanced NSCLC, pemetrexed-based doublet treatment tended to be associated with improved PFS, ORR, and increased toxicity, but not OS.

Chemotherapy plus Erlotinib versus Chemotherapy Alone for Treating Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether a combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is beneficial for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to summarize the currently available evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy alone for treating advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 3599 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus erlotinib was superior in PFS (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], P = 0.006), and no statistically significant difference was observed in OS (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.86, 1.03], P = 0.16). Intercalated erlotinib plus chemotherapy demonstrated improvements in PFS (HR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.50, 0.91], P = 0.009) and OS (HR = 0.82 [95% CI 0.69, 0.98], P = 0.03). Continuous erlotinib plus chemotherapy treatment failed to demonstrate improvements in PFS (HR = 0.91 [95% CI 0.80, 1.04], P = 0.16) and OS (HR = 0.98 [95% CI 0.89, 1.09], P = 0.75). The association of chemotherapy plus erlotinib with improvement in PFS was significant in never smoking patients (HR = 0.46 [95% CI 0.37, 0.56], P<0.00001) but not in smoking patients (HR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.49, 1.00], P = 0.05). Among patients with EGFR mutant tumors, chemotherapy plus erlotinib demonstrated significant improvements in PFS (HR = 0.31 [95% CI 0.17, 0.58], P = 0.0002) and OS (HR = 0.52 [95% CI 0.30, 0.88], P = 0.01). Among patients with EGFR wild-type tumors, no statistically significant difference was observed with respect to PFS (HR = 0.87 [95% CI 0.70, 1.08], P = 0.21) and OS (HR = 0.78 [95% CI 0.59, 1.01], P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Combination of chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable treatment option for patients with NSCLC, especially for patients who never smoked and patients with EGFR mutation-positive disease. In addition, intercalated administration is an effective combinatorial strategy.