Dataset Information

Avelumab in Combination With Cetuximab and Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Patients With Advanced Squamous NSCLC

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

We present the results of a phase 2a trial of first-line avelumab (anti–programmed death-ligand 1 antibody) plus cetuximab (anti–EGFR antibody) in patients with advanced squamous NSCLC.

Methods

Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous NSCLC received avelumab 800 mg (d 1 and 8), cetuximab 250 mg/m2 (d 1) and 500 mg/m2 (d 8), cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (d 1), and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 (d 1 and 8) for four 3-week cycles, followed by avelumab 800 mg and cetuximab 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the best overall response; the secondary end points were progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, and safety. Efficacy analyses were reported from an updated data cutoff.

Results

A total of 43 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up was 6.6 months for the primary analyses and 9.2 months for the efficacy analyses. In the efficacy analyses, 15 patients had a confirmed partial response (objective response rate, 34.9% [95% confidence interval: 21.0%–50.9%]), and the median duration of response was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval: 4.2–12.5 mo). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.1 months and 10.0 months, respectively. In the safety analyses (primary analysis), 38 patients (88.4%) had a treatment-related adverse event, of whom 24 (55.8%) had a grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse event.

Conclusions

The combination of avelumab + cetuximab and chemotherapy showed antitumor activity and tolerable safety; however, the ORR was not improved compared with those reported for current standards of care (NCT03717155).

SUBMITTER: Andric Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9883276 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveResults of CameL-sq has revealed the clinical benefits to patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus chemotherapy to treat sq-NSCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsWe used a partitioned survival model with a lifetime horizon to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy in treating sq-NSCLC. Baseline characteristics of patients and key clinical data were extracted from CameL-sq. Costs and utilities were collected from the open-access database and published literature. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were chosen as economic outcome indicators. We also performed a sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and scenario analysis to verify the stability of the basic analysis results and explore the results under different scenarios.ResultsCombination therapy added 0.47 QALYS and 0.91 life-years with an incremental cost of $6,347.81 compared with chemotherapy, which had an ICER of $13,572 per QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that camrelizumab plus chemotherapy had a 37.8% probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of 1 time GDP per capital. When WTP was set as 3 times GDP per capital, combination therapy had significant cost-effectiveness. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that cost of the best supportive care was the factor with the greatest influence. The subgroup analysis found that combination therapy was associated with cost-effectiveness in several subgroups, namely, patients with disease stage IIIB/IIIC and with PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≤ 1%. Scenario analysis showed that ICER was positively correlated with the price of camrelizumab.ConclusionIn this economic evaluation, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was unlikely to be cost-effective compared with chemotherapy in the first line therapy of sq-NSCLC from a perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Reducing the price of camrelizumab and tailoring treatments based on individual patient factors might improve the cost-effectiveness. Our findings may provide evidence for clinicians in making optimal decisions in general clinical practice.

Project description:Background and objectiveSintilimab has superior efficacy and safety in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its cost-effectiveness in China is unclear. This study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy vs. pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC in China.MethodsFrom the perspective of the Chinese health system, the partitioned survival model with three health states was established in a 3-week cycle and a lifetime time horizon. The two-stage method was used to estimate the overall survival hazard ratios to avoid the bias by crossover design in ORIENT-12 and KEYNOTE-407 studies. The anchored matching adjusted indirect comparison method (MAIC) was used for indirect comparison based on the individual patient data from ORIENT-12 and the publicly published KEYNOTE-407 study due to the lack of head-to-head clinical trials. Only direct medical costs were included, and utilities were derived from the published literature in the base case analysis. Sensitivity analysis was also performed to verify the robustness of the model results. In addition, the scenario analysis where the utilities were derived from the Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) scale in the ORIENT-12 by mapping to the EuroQol-5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) was carried out to explore the uncertainty of the results.ResultsCompared with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, sintilimab + chemotherapy incurred a lower lifetime cost ($12,321 vs. 36,371) and yielded fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (0.9902 vs. 1.0085), which resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1,314,208/QALY. A sintilimab strategy is a cost-effectiveness option under the WTP of 1-3 times the GDP per capita in China ($11,250/QALY~$33,749/QALY). The utility value of the post-progression, the unit cost of albumin paclitaxel, and the utility value of the progression-free state were the main drivers in the deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA). According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), sintilimab + chemotherapy was 100% cost-effective when the WTP was 1-3 times China's per capita GDP. The results of the scenario analysis showed that sintilimab + chemotherapy obtained more QALYs (1.2319 vs. 1.1815) and lower costs ($12,321 vs. 36,371), which implied that sintilimab + chemotherapy may dominate the pembrolizumab + chemotherapy.ConclusionCompared with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, sintilimab + chemotherapy is more cost-effective for first-line treatment in Chinese patients with locally advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC.

Project description:The impact of combining epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) and chemotherapy as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. Therefore, randomized trials that compared this combined regimen with chemotherapy or EGFR-TKIs monotherapy were included for this meta-analysis. We used published hazard ratios (HRs), if available, or derived treatment estimates from other survival data. Pooled estimates of treatment efficacy of the combined regimen in the entire unselected population and selected patients by EGFR-mutation status and smoking history were calculated. Eight trials eventually entered into this meta-analysis, including 4585 patients. Overall, the combined regimen significantly delayed disease progression (HR?=?0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95, P?=?0.01); subgroup analysis showed significantly higher progression free survival advantages in Asian patients (P<0.001), with sequential combination of TKIs and chemotherapy (P?=?0.02). In selected patients by EGFR-mutation, both mutation positive (HR?=?0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.83, P?=?0.009) and negative (HR?=?0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98, P?=?0.02) patients gained progression free survival benefit from the combined regimen, albeit the magnitude of benefit was marginally larger in mutation positive patients (P?=?0.05). In selected patients by smoking history, never/light smokers achieved a great progression free survival benefit from the combined regimen (HR?=?0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.74, P?=?0.0004). Unfortunately, the combined regimen had no significant impact on overall survival, irrespective of ethnicity, dose schedules or EGFR-mutation status. Severe anorexia (RR?=?2.01, 95% CI 1.11-3.63; P?=?0.02) and diarrhea (RR?=?2.70, 95% CI 1.94-3.76; P<0.001) were more frequent in the combined regimen arm. This strategy of combining EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy deserved to be considered in the future, although it is not approved for advanced NSCLC at the moment.

Project description:BackgroundIn the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.Findings1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3-29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4-30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87-1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0-12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1-13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82-1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5-27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5-24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5-31·7).InterpretationThis trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended.FundingCancer Research UK, Cancer Research Wales, UK Medical Research Council, Merck KGgA.

Project description:BackgroundThe combination of chemotherapy and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) currently has become the hotspot issue in the treatment of non-small lung cancer (NSCLC). This systematic review was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the synchronous combination of these two treatments with EGFR TKIs or chemotherapy alone in advanced NSCLC.MethodsEMBASE, PubMed, the Central Registry of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Chinese biomedical literature database (CNKI) and meeting summaries were searched. The Phase II/III randomized controlled trials were selected by which patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive a combination of EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy by synchronous mode vs. EGFR TKIs or chemotherapy alone.ResultsA total of six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 4675 patients were enrolled in the systematic review. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the synchronous combination group of chemotherapy and EGFR TKIs did not reach satisfactory results; there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP) and objective response rate (ORR), compared with monotherapy (OS: HR = 1.05, 95%CI = 0.98-1.12; TTP: HR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.89-1.00; ORR: RR = 1.07, 95%CI = 0.98-1.17), and no significant difference in OS and progression-free survival (PFS), compared with EGFR TKIs alone (OS: HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.83-1.46; PFS: HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.67-1.10). The patients who received synchronous combined therapy presented with increased incidences of grade 3/4 anemia (RR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.10-1.79) and rash (RR = 7.43, 95% CI = 4.56-12.09), compared with chemotherapy, grade 3/4 anemia (RR = 6.71, 95% CI = 1.25-35.93) and fatigue (RR = 9.60, 95% CI = 2.28-40.86) compared with EGFR TKI monotherapy.ConclusionsThe synchronous combination of chemotherapy and TKIs is not superior to chemotherapy or EGFR TKIs alone for the first-line treatment of NSCLC.