Dataset Information

Possibility of brigatinib-based therapy, or chemotherapy plus anti-angiogenic treatment after resistance of osimertinib harboring EGFR T790M-cis-C797S mutations in lung adenocarcinoma patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There was no standard treatment for patients who acquired resistance to osimertinib mediated by epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M-cis-C797S. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between different therapeutic strategies and survival outcomes among these patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed 46 patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR T790M-cis-C797S after osimertinib progression from January 1, 2017 to October 31, 2020. Among them, 13 patients received brigatinib-based therapy, 23 patients received chemotherapy in combination of anti-angiogenics or not, and 10 patients received other targeted treatments like dacomtinib, bevacizumab, or a combined therapy of osimertinib and other targeted drugs.

Results

Compared to other targeted therapy, brigatinib-based therapy (median progression-free survival [mPFS]: 4.40 vs. 1.63 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21-0.73, p = 0.001) and chemotherapy-based treatment (mPFS: 4.70 vs. 1.63 months, HR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.06-0.50, p < 0.001) presented a better survival outcome and there was no significant difference between brigatinib-based therapy and chemotherapy-based treatment (mPFS: 4.40 vs. 4.70 months, HR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.57-2.67, p = 0.58). Chemotherapy combined with anti-angiogenics achieved a better efficacy than only chemotherapy (mPFS: 5.50 vs. 1.03 months, HR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.11-0.83, p = 0.02). Patients carrying EGFR exon 19 deletion mutation had a longer PFS than those who harboring EGFR exon 21 p.L858R mutation (4.57 vs. 1.03 months, HR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.06-0.54, p = 0.001), no matter they received brigatinib-based therapy (mPFS: 5.00 vs. 3.23 months, HR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.01-0.96, p = 0.05) or chemotherapy-based treatment (mPFS: 7.23 vs. 1.03 months, HR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.49, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Brigatinib-based therapy and chemotherapy plus anti-angiogenics could be considered beyond progression from osimertinib therapy. For patients harboring EGFR exon 19 deletion/T790M/cis-C797S mutation, the clinical efficacy was superior to patients harboring EGFR exon 21 p.L858R/T790M/cis-C797S mutation.

SUBMITTER: Yang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8633234 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFrequent failures observed in some trials comparing the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab to osimertinib monotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) alterations have brought questions.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of these two treatment regimens in advanced NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations.DesignThis study is a systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources and methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases were extensively searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on 14 May 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, assessed quality, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). The secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and PFS stratified by patients' characteristics. STATA 17.0 software (StataCorp LLC, USA) was adopted for meta-analysis.ResultsA total of four RCTs involving 390 patients were included. Overall, the risk of bias across the studies was moderate to low. Pooled results showed that compared to osimertinib alone, the addition of bevacizumab to osimertinib failed to show prolongation of PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-1.27], OS (HR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.73-1.41), or improvement of the ORR (risk ratio = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.90-1.38), while an increased incidence of some AEs was observed, such as nausea, oral mucositis, hypertension, and proteinuria. Notably, combination treatment did significantly prolong the PFS in the subset of smokers (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.44-0.94). A mild trend toward PFS benefit under the combined regimen was also noted in patients with brain metastases and first-line treatment, though not reaching statistical significance.ConclusionBased on the available evidence, the addition of bevacizumab to osimertinib could not provide additional survival benefits with higher but manageable toxicity for EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Osimertinib monotherapy remains the prioritized treatment. Further investigation is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundThe mechanism of missense alteration at EGFR L792F in patients with non-small cell lung cancer resistant to osimertinib has not been sufficiently clarified. We aimed to explore the critical molecular events and coping strategies in osimertinib resistance due to acquired L792F mutation.MethodsCirculating tumor DNA-based sequencing data of 1153 patients with osimertinib resistance were collected to illustrate the prevalence of EGFR L792F mutation. Sensitivity to osimertinib was tested with constructed EGFR 19Del/T790M-cis-L792F cell lines in vitro and in vivo. The correlation and linked pathways between M2 macrophage polarization and EGFR L792Fcis-induced osimertinib resistance were investigated. Possible interventions to suppress osimertinib resistance by targeting IL-4 or STAT3 were explored.FindingsThe concomitant EGFR L792F was identified as an independent mutation following the acquisition of T790M after osimertinib resistance, in that 5 of the 946 patients with osimertinib resistance harbored EGFR T790M-cis-L792F mutation. Transfected EGFR 19Del/T790M-cis-L792F in cell lines had decreased sensitivity to osimertinib and enhanced infiltrating macrophage with M2 polarization. Silico analyses confirmed the role of M2 polarization in osimertinib resistance induced by EGFR T790M-cis-L792F mutation. EGFR T790M-cis-L792F mutation upregulated phosphorylation of STAT3 Tyr705 and promoted its specific binding to IL4 promoter, enhancing IL-4 expression and secretion and inducing macrophage M2 polarization. Furthermore, blockade of STAT3/IL-4 (SH-4-54 or dupilumab) suppressed macrophage M2 polarization and regressed tumor sensitivity to osimertinib.InterpretationOur results proved that targeting EGFR T790M-cis-L792F/STAT3 Tyr705/IL-4 pathway could be a potential strategy to suppress osimertinib resistance in NSCLC.FundingThis work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81871889, 82072586, 81902910), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (7212084, 7214249), the China National Natural Science Foundation Key Program (81630071), the National Key Research and Development Project (2019YFC1315704), CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS 2021-1-I2M-012), Aiyou Foundation (KY201701) and CAMS Key Laboratory of translational research on lung cancer (2018PT31035).

Project description:BackgroundOsimertinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. The efficacy of osimertinib as compared with platinum-based therapy plus pemetrexed in such patients is unknown.MethodsIn this randomized, international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned 419 patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, who had disease progression after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy, in a 2:1 ratio to receive either oral osimertinib (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) or intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus either carboplatin (target area under the curve, 5 [AUC5]) or cisplatin (75 mg per square meter) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles; maintenance pemetrexed was allowed. In all the patients, disease had progressed during receipt of first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival.ResultsThe median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (10.1 months vs. 4.4 months; hazard ratio; 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.41; P<0.001). The objective response rate was significantly better with osimertinib (71%; 95% CI, 65 to 76) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (31%; 95% CI, 24 to 40) (odds ratio for objective response, 5.39; 95% CI, 3.47 to 8.48; P<0.001). Among 144 patients with metastases to the central nervous system (CNS), the median duration of progression-free survival was longer among patients receiving osimertinib than among those receiving platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (8.5 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.49). The proportion of patients with adverse events of grade 3 or higher was lower with osimertinib (23%) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (47%).ConclusionsOsimertinib had significantly greater efficacy than platinum therapy plus pemetrexed in patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (including those with CNS metastases) in whom disease had progressed during first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; AURA3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02151981 .).