First experience with osimertinib in patients with T790M mutation previously treated with EGFR – TKIs in Croatia

e20518

Background: EGFR T790M mutation is responsible for around 60% cases of resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in patients who have lung cancer with an activating EGFR mutation. Methods: We administered osimertinib 80 mg once daily in 8 patients with advanced lung cancer who had radiologically documented disease progression after previous treatment with first and second-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Results: We treated 8 patients with osimertinib with stage IV lung adenocarcinoma. Four patients were males and four were females, median age 62 (raging from 54 to 82). Four patients were never smoker, and four were ex-smokers. All patients had initially deletion 19 in EGFR gene and then developed T790M mutation. In all patients T790M was proven from tumor tissue. Majority of patients were ECOG 1. All patients were previously treated with first or second line EGFR TKIs (erlotinib, gefitinib or afatinib) and had radiologically documented disease progression. Three patients were treated with osimertinib in third line setting, 2 in fourth, one in fifth, one in sixth and one even in tenth line setting. Median time to response was 4 weeks (raging from 3 to 7). All 8 patients had partial response (PR) with still no recorded disease progression. Duration of response is from 7 to 46 weeks and still ongoing. No significant side effects were observed. Conclusions: Osimertinib is highly active in patients with lung adenocarcinoma which harbor EGFR T790M mutation who had had disease progression during prior therapy with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. There were no serious side effects of treatment.

Cancer-related inflammation as predicting tool for treatment outcome in locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths and the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents 80% of all cases. In most cases when diagnosed, it is in locally advanced or metastatic stage, when platinum based doublet chemotherapy is the established therapeutic option for majority of the patients. Predictive factors to filter the patients who will benefit the most from the chemotherapy are not clearly defined. Objective of this study was to explore predictive value of pre-treatment C-reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen and their interaction, for the response to the frontline chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study 170 patients with locally advanced and metastatic NSCLC were included. Relationship between baseline level of CRP and fibrinogen and response to the frontline chemotherapy was assessed.

RESULTS

We found that pre-treatment CRP and fibrinogen values were statistically significantly correlated. Chemotherapy and CRP, fibrinogen, and their interaction were independently significantly associated with disease control rate at re-evaluation. There was statistically significant difference in median pre-treatment CRP level between the patients with disease control or progression at re-evaluation, 13.8 vs. 30.0 mg/L respectively, P=0.026. By Johnson-Neyman technique we found that in patients with initial fibrinogen value below 3.5 g/L, CRP level was significantly associated with disease control or progression of the disease. Above this fibrinogen value the association of CRP and disease control was lost.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study support the growing evidence of inflammation and cancer relationship, where elevated pre-treatment level of CRP has negative predictive significance on the NSCLC frontline chemotherapy response.

Maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care for non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown the efficacy, tolerability, and ease of administration of pemetrexed-an antifolate antineoplastic agent-in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We assessed pemetrexed as maintenance therapy in patients with this disease.

METHODS

This randomised double-blind study was undertaken in 83 centres in 20 countries. 663 patients with stage IIIB or IV disease who had not progressed on four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2), day 1) plus best supportive care (n=441) or placebo plus best supportive care (n=222) in 21-day cycles until disease progression. Treatment was randomised with the Simon and Pocock minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment. All patients received vitamin B(12), folic acid, and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival and the secondary endpoint of overall survival were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00102804.

FINDINGS

All randomly assigned participants were analysed. Pemetrexed significantly improved progression-free survival (4.3 months [95% CI 4.1-4.7] vs 2.6 months [1.7-2.8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.42-0.61, p<0.0001) and overall survival (13.4 months [11.9-15.9] vs 10.6 months [8.7-12.0]; HR 0.79, 0.65-0.95, p=0.012) compared with placebo. Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related toxic effects were higher in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (21 [5%] vs three [1%]). Drug-related grade three or higher toxic effects were higher with pemetrexed than with placebo (70 [16%] vs nine [4%]; p<0.0001), specifically fatigue (22 [5%] vs one [1%], p=0.001) and neutropenia (13 [3%] vs 0, p=0.006). No pemetrexed-related deaths occurred. Relatively fewer patients in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group received systemic post-discontinuation therapy (227 [51%] vs 149 [67%]; p=0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is well tolerated and offers improved progression-free and overall survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine first-line chemotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine or best supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A phase III trial

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this randomized phase III study was to show significant difference in median time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with single-agent gemcitabine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care following gemcitabine plus cisplatin initial first-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) every 21 days. Patients achieving objective response or disease stabilization following initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy were randomized (2:1 fashion) to receive maintenance gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (GEM arm), or best supportive care only (BSC arm).

RESULTS

Between November 1999 and November 2002, we enrolled 352 patients (median age: 57 years; stage IV disease: 74%; Karnofsky performance status (KPS) >80: 41%). Following initial therapy, 206 patients were randomized and treated with gemcitabine (138) or best supportive care (68). TTP throughout the study period was 6.6 and 5 months for GEM and BSC arms, respectively, while values for the maintenance period were 3.6 and 2.0 months (for p < 0.001 for both). Median overall survival (OS) throughout study was 13.0 months for GEM and 11.0 months for BSC arms (p = 0.195). The toxicity profile was mild, with neutropenia being most common grade 3/4 toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance therapy with gemcitabine, following initial therapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, was feasible, and produced significantly longer TTP compared to best supportive care alone. Further studies are warranted to establish the place of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.