Dataset Information

Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Pharmacodynamic Separation of Pemetrexed and Intercalated Erlotinib Versus Pemetrexed Alone for Advanced Nonsquamous, Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Pharmacodynamic separation of pemetrexed and erlotinib avoids negative cellular interactions and results in antitumor synergy in erlotinib-resistant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells, independent of EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) genotype. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients with platinum-treated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:2 to pemetrexed alone (500 mg/m2 provided intravenously on day 1) or pemetrexed followed by erlotinib (150 mg provided orally once daily on days 2-17) every 21 days. EGFR genotype was centrally confirmed by Sequenom multiplex oncogenotyping assay. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), which would be considered promising for future study if median PFS was ? 4.5 months. RESULTS:Of 83 patients enrolled, 79 were randomized to either pemetrexed alone (n = 27) or in combination (n = 52). Fifty-nine (79%) of 75 eligible patients had tumors with confirmed EGFR genotype: 7 with activating mutations and 52 wild type. Median PFS was 4.7 and 2.9 months in the combination and pemetrexed-alone groups, respectively. In patients with EGFR wild-type tumors, median PFS was 5.3 and 3.5 months in the combination and pemetrexed-alone groups, respectively. Objective response rate (29% vs. 10%, P = .17), 6-month PFS (45% vs. 29%, P = .26), and 12-month PFS (23% vs. 10%, P = .28) were all higher in the combination arm. Rash (67% vs. 26%, P = .0007) and diarrhea (44% vs. 11%, P = .003) were significantly more common in the combination arm. CONCLUSION:In patients with unselected or EGFR wild-type advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, pharmacodynamic separation of pemetrexed and intercalated erlotinib had promising antitumor activity without new safety concerns. The combination merits further evaluation as maintenance or second-line therapy against new standards in patients with EGFR wild-type advanced NSCLC.

SUBMITTER: Li T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5497702 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Pharmacodynamic Separation of Pemetrexed and Intercalated Erlotinib Versus Pemetrexed Alone for Advanced Nonsquamous, Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

Li Tianhong T Piperdi Bilal B Walsh William V WV Kim Mimi M Beckett Laurel A LA Gucalp Rasim R Haigentz Missak M Bathini Venu G VG Wen Huiyu H Zhou Kaili K Pasquinelli Patricia B PB Gajavelli Srikanth S Sreedhara Meera M Xie Xianhong X Lara Primo N PN Gandara David R DR Perez-Soler Roman R

Clinical lung cancer 20161028 1

<h4>Background</h4>Pharmacodynamic separation of pemetrexed and erlotinib avoids negative cellular interactions and results in antitumor synergy in erlotinib-resistant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells, independent of EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) genotype.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients with platinum-treated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC were randomly assigned 1:2 to pemetrexed alone (500 mg/m<sup>2</sup> provided intravenously on day 1) or pemetrexed followed by erlotinib ...[more]

PMID: 27919627

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPRONOUNCE compared the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed+carboplatin followed by pemetrexed (Pem+Cb) with paclitaxel+carboplatin+bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab (Pac+Cb+Bev) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsPatients ≥18 years of age with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer v7.0), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 were randomized (1:1) to four cycles of induction Pem+Cb (pemetrexed, 500 mg/m, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6) followed by Pem maintenance or Pac+Cb+Bev (paclitaxel, 200 mg/m, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6, and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg) followed by Bev maintenance in the absence of progressive disease or discontinuation. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) without grade 4 toxicity (G4PFS). Secondary end points were PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Resource utilization was also assessed.ResultsBaseline characteristics of the patients randomized to Pem+Cb (N = 182) and Pac+Cb+Bev (N = 179) were well balanced between the arms. Median (months) G4PFS was 3.91 for Pem+Cb and 2.86 for Pac+Cb+Bev (hazard ratio = 0.85, 90% confidence interval, 0.7-1.04; p = 0.176); PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR did not differ significantly between the arms. Significantly more drug-related grade 3/4 anemia (18.7% versus 5.4%) and thrombocytopenia (24.0% versus 9.6%) were reported for Pem+Cb. Significantly more grade 3/4 neutropenia (48.8% versus 24.6%), grade 1/2 alopecia (28.3% versus 8.2%), and grade 1/2 sensory neuropathy were reported for Pac+Cb+Bev. Number of hospitalizations and overall length of stay did not differ significantly between the arms.ConclusionsPem+Cb did not produce significantly better G4PFS compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Pem+Cb was not superior in PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Both regimens were well tolerated, although, toxicity profiles differed.

Project description:ImportanceFew clinical trials have been specifically designed for elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and the anticipated increase in the number of such patients has prompted a search for new treatment options that provide a greater palliative benefit.ObjectiveTo determine whether treatment with carboplatin plus pemetrexed followed by pemetrexed maintenance is noninferior compared with docetaxel monotherapy with regard to overall survival (OS) for elderly patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, multicenter, noninferiority phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 79 institutions in Japan. Cytotoxic chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and age of 75 years or older were enrolled between August 2013 and February 2017. Data were analyzed from November 2018 to February 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive either docetaxel monotherapy (60 mg/m2) every 3 weeks or 4 cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve of 5) plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) administered every 3 weeks followed by maintenance therapy with the same dose of pemetrexed for 3 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was OS analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with a noninferiority margin of 1.154 for the upper limit of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) estimated with a stratified Cox regression model.ResultsOf the 433 enrolled patients, 250 (57.7%) were male, and the median (range) age was 78 (75-88) years. The median OS was 15.5 months (95% CI, 13.6-18.4) in the docetaxel group (n?=?217) and 18.7 months (95% CI, 16.0-21.9) in the carboplatin-pemetrexed group (n?=?216), with a stratified HR for OS of 0.850 (95% CI, 0.684-1.056; P for noninferiority?=?.003). Progression-free survival was also longer in the carboplatin-pemetrexed group (unstratified HR, 0.739; 95% CI, 0.609-0.896). Compared with those in the docetaxel group, those in the carboplatin-pemetrexed had lower rates of leukopenia (60 of 214 [28.0%] vs 147 of 214 [68.7%]) and neutropenia (99 of 214 [46.3%] vs 184 of 214 [86.0%]) of grade 3 or 4 and of febrile neutropenia (9 of 214 [4.2%] vs 38 of 214 [17.8%]) and higher rates of thrombocytopenia (55 of 214 [25.7%] vs 3 of 214 [1.4%]) and anemia (63 of 214 [29.4%] vs 4 of 214 [1.9%]) of grade 3 or 4. Dose reductions were less frequent with carboplatin-pemetrexed.Conclusion and relevanceCarboplatin-pemetrexed treatment followed by pemetrexed maintenance is a valid option for first-line treatment of elderly patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.Trial registrationUniversity Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: UMIN000011460.

Project description:BackgroundWhether 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.MethodsEMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).ResultsNine 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).ConclusionCombination 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.

Project description:BackgroundBevacizumab and erlotinib target different tumour growth pathways with little overlap in their toxic-effect profiles. On the basis of promising results from a phase 1/2 trial assessing safety and activity of erlotinib plus bevacizumab for recurrent or refractory non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we aimed to assess efficacy and safety of this combination in a phase 3 trial.MethodsIn our double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 3 trial (BeTa), we enrolled patients with recurrent or refractory NSCLC who presented to 177 study sites in 12 countries after failure of first-line treatment. Patients were randomly allocated in a one-to-one ratio to receive erlotinib plus bevacizumab (bevacizumab group) or erlotinib plus placebo (control group) according to a computer-generated randomisation sequence by use of an interactive voice response system. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all enrolled patients. Patients, study staff, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed safety by calculation of incidence of adverse events and tissue was collected for biomarker analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00130728.FindingsOverall survival did not differ between 317 controls and 319 patients in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·80-1·18, p=0·7583). Median overall survival was 9·3 months (IQR 4·1-21·6) for patients in the bevacizumab group compared with 9·2 months (3·8-20·2) for controls. Progression-free survival seemed to be longer in the bevacizumab group (3·4 months [1·4-8·4]) than in the control group (1·7 months [1·3-4·1]; HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·52-0·75) and objective response rate suggested some clinical activity of bevacizumab and erlotinib. However, these secondary endpoint differences could not be defined as significant because the study prespecified that the primary endpoint had to be significant before testing of secondary endpoints could be done, to control type I error rate. In the bevacizumab group, 130 (42%) of 313 patients with safety data had a serious adverse event, compared with 114 (36%) controls. There were 20 (6%) grade 5 adverse events, including two arterial thromboembolic events, in the bevacizumab group, and 14 (4%) in the control group.InterpretationAddition of bevacizumab to erlotinib does not improve survival in patients with recurrent or refractory NSCLC.FundingGenentech.

Dataset Information

Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Pharmacodynamic Separation of Pemetrexed and Intercalated Erlotinib Versus Pemetrexed Alone for Advanced Nonsquamous, Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

Publications

Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Pharmacodynamic Separation of Pemetrexed and Intercalated Erlotinib Versus Pemetrexed Alone for Advanced Nonsquamous, Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure