Biomarker Analyses and Final Overall Survival Results From a Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label, First-Line Study of Gefitinib Versus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel in Clinically Selected Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Asia (IPASS)

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 2866-2874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiro Fukuoka ◽  
Yi-Long Wu ◽  
Sumitra Thongprasert ◽  
Patrapim Sunpaweravong ◽  
Swan-Swan Leong ◽  
...  

Purpose The results of the Iressa Pan-Asia Study (IPASS), which compared gefitinib and carboplatin/paclitaxel in previously untreated never-smokers and light ex-smokers with advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma were published previously. This report presents overall survival (OS) and efficacy according to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) biomarker status. Patients and Methods In all, 1,217 patients were randomly assigned. Biomarkers analyzed were EGFR mutation (amplification mutation refractory system; 437 patients evaluable), EGFR gene copy number (fluorescent in situ hybridization; 406 patients evaluable), and EGFR protein expression (immunohistochemistry; 365 patients evaluable). OS analysis was performed at 78% maturity. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess biomarker status by randomly assigned treatment interactions for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Results OS (954 deaths) was similar for gefitinib and carboplatin/paclitaxel with no significant difference between treatments overall (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.02; P = .109) or in EGFR mutation–positive (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.33; P = .990) or EGFR mutation–negative (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.63; P = .309; treatment by EGFR mutation interaction P = .480) subgroups. A high proportion (64.3%) of EGFR mutation–positive patients randomly assigned to carboplatin/paclitaxel received subsequent EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. PFS was significantly longer with gefitinib for patients whose tumors had both high EGFR gene copy number and EGFR mutation (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.67) but significantly shorter when high EGFR gene copy number was not accompanied by EGFR mutation (HR, 3.85; 95% CI, 2.09 to 7.09). Conclusion EGFR mutations are the strongest predictive biomarker for PFS and tumor response to first-line gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel. The predictive value of EGFR gene copy number was driven by coexisting EGFR mutation (post hoc analysis). Treatment-related differences observed for PFS in the EGFR mutation–positive subgroup were not apparent for OS. OS results were likely confounded by the high proportion of patients crossing over to the alternative treatment.

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (31) ◽  
pp. 5034-5042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred R. Hirsch ◽  
Marileila Varella-Garcia ◽  
Paul A. Bunn ◽  
Wilbur A. Franklin ◽  
Rafal Dziadziuszko ◽  
...  

Purpose The phase III Iressa Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer (ISEL) trial compared gefitinib with placebo in 1,692 patients with refractory advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. We analyzed ISEL tumor biopsy samples to examine relationships between biomarkers and clinical outcome after gefitinib treatment in a placebo-controlled setting. Methods Biomarkers included epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number by fluorescence in situ hybridization (n = 370); EGFR (n = 379) and phosphorylated Akt (p-Akt) protein expression (n = 382) by immunohistochemistry; and mutations in EGFR (n = 215), KRAS (n = 152), and BRAF (n = 118). Results High EGFR gene copy number was a predictor of a gefitinib-related effect on survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61 for high copy number and HR, 1.16 for low copy number; comparison of high v low copy number HR, P = .045). EGFR protein expression was also related to clinical outcome (HR for positive, 0.77; HR for negative, 1.57; comparison of high v low protein expression HR, P = .049). Patients with EGFR mutations had higher response rates than patients without EGFR mutations (37.5% v 2.6%); there were insufficient data for survival analysis. No relationship was observed between p-Akt protein expression and survival outcome, and the limited amount of data collected for KRAS and BRAF mutations prevented any meaningful evaluation of clinical outcomes in relation to these mutations. Conclusion EGFR gene copy number was a predictor of clinical benefit from gefitinib in ISEL. Additional studies are warranted to assess these biomarkers fully for the identification of patients most likely to benefit from gefitinib treatment.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6005-6005 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Licitra ◽  
F. Rolland ◽  
C. Bokemeyer ◽  
E. Remenar ◽  
H. Kienzer ◽  
...  

6005 Background: Platinum-based CT + cetuximab is the first systemic therapy in ∼30 years to show a survival benefit vs platinum-based CT in first-line R/M SCCHN (Vermorken JB, et al. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1116–1127). A retrospective analysis has evaluated the influence of EGFR gene copy number, determined by FISH, on clinical outcome in the EXTREME study. Methods: Pts were randomized to 3-weekly cycles of platinum-based CT (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 5, day 1; 5-fluorouracil 1000 mg/m2/day continuous infusion, days 1–4) with or without cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 weekly). The proportion of FISH+ cells per pt (FISH score) was determined using 5 different enrichment models. Tumors were also classified as FISH+ or FISH- using the Colorado scoring system. Results: In the overall population (n=442), addition of cetuximab significantly improved median OS (10.1 vs 7.4 months; p=0.04). No association between FISH score and OS, PFS, or best overall response was determined for any enrichment model. Pts with Colorado FISH+ tumors were evenly distributed between the CT + cetuximab (50/158) and CT-alone (51/154) arms of the FISH- evaluable population (71% of ITT population). Colorado FISH status had no influence on OS in either treatment arm, on PFS in the CT-alone arm, or on RR in the CT + cetuximab arm (see table ). In the CT + cetuximab arm, pts with FISH+ tumors had a lower risk of progression than pts with FISH- tumors. Higher RRs among pts with FISH- tumors in the CT-alone arm may have been due to twice as many nonevaluable response observations in the FISH+ vs the FISH- population (percentage of pts with SD or PD was comparable). Conclusions: EGFR gene copy number, as determined by FISH, is not a predictive biomarker for cetuximab efficacy in R/M SCCHN. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]


Pathology ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-36
Author(s):  
Prudence A. Russell ◽  
Y.U. Yong ◽  
D.O. Hongdo ◽  
Timothy D. Clay ◽  
Melissa M. Moore ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18553-e18553
Author(s):  
Yaewon Yang ◽  
Hyun Chang ◽  
Jong-Seok Lee ◽  
YuJung Kim ◽  
Sang-hoon Jheon ◽  
...  

e18553 Background: The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognostic role of genomoic gain and expression for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene in surgically resected non-adenocarcinoma of non-small-cell lung cancer (NA-NSCLC). Methods: This retrospective study included 115 NA-NSCLC consecutive patients with available tumor tissue and survival data, median follow up period of 6.4 years. EGFR gene copy number and protein expression was evaluated using by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) in tissue microarray sections, respectively. Results: Among 115 patients, 99 patients (86.1 %) were with squamous cell carcinoma histology. EGFR gene amplification and high polysomy (EGFR FISH+) were observed in 57 (49.6%) and 45 (39.1%) patients, respectively. Patients with EGFR FISH+ had significantly shorter overall survival [median, 41 months vs. not reached (>70 months), P = 0.011]. Multivariable model confirmed that patients with EGFR FISH+ had a significantly greater risk of death than those with EGFR FISH-negative after adjusting pathologic staging, presence of pleural invasion, venous invasion and adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 2.11, 95% confidence interval 1.23-3.61, P = 0.006). EGFR IHC expression did not associate with overall survival in same group. Conclusions: EGFR increased gene copy number is an independent negative prognostic factor in surgically resected NA-NSCLC.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7597-7597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murry W. Wynes ◽  
Simon Ekman ◽  
Bernadette Reyna Asuncion ◽  
Rafal Dziadziuszko ◽  
Bonnie S. Glisson ◽  
...  

7597 Background: Early clinical data suggested figitumumab (F), an anti-IGF-1R antibody, had clinical activity in several tumor types. However, two phase III studies, A4021016 carboplatin/paclitaxel (CP) +/- F in 1st line treatment or A4021018 erlotinib (E) +/- F in 2nd line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, were closed prematurely due to futility. Neither study used biomarker driven selection criteria. The aim of this study was to retrospectively examine the phase III specimens in order to determine if IGF-1R PE or GCN could discriminate response and/or outcome to F. Methods: IGF-1R PE was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and the tumor specimens were scored using the H-score method (0-300) with separate enumeration of membranous and cytoplasmic components and then combination of these scores. GCN was evaluated by bright field silver in situ hybridization (SISH) with recording the average copy number for 50 tumor cells. Results: IHC was evaluable in 25 CP+F, 20 CP, 27 E+F and 26 E specimens whereas SISH was evaluable in 24, 17, 21 and 22 specimens, respectively. Median PE for membrane, cytoplasm and both in A4021016 were 130, 110 and 120 and in A4021018 they were 135, 140 and 140. Median GCN was 1.88 and 1.98 for A4021016 and A4021018, respectively. There were no significant differences in PE or GCN between treatment arms within each study. Neither PE nor GCN were able to discriminate between response/non-response or disease control/progression in either study. Likewise, neither study showed a significant difference in OS or PFS when using the median cut-points for either PE or GCN. Conclusions: Neither IGF1R PE or GCN were able to discriminate response or outcome in the limited quantity of specimens available from two studies that examined the IGF-1R targeted therapy figitumumab.


2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 556 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Soulières ◽  
T. Ciuleanu ◽  
L. Stelmakh ◽  
R. Whittom ◽  
P. Delmar ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document