scholarly journals Results From the Phase III Randomized Trial of Onartuzumab Plus Erlotinib Versus Erlotinib in Previously Treated Stage IIIB or IV Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: METLung

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 412-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Spigel ◽  
Martin J. Edelman ◽  
Kenneth O’Byrne ◽  
Luis Paz-Ares ◽  
Simonetta Mocci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose The phase III OAM4971g study (METLung) examined the efficacy and safety of onartuzumab plus erlotinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer selected by MET immunohistochemistry whose disease had progressed after treatment with a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to receive onartuzumab (15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day cycle) plus daily oral erlotinib 150 mg or intravenous placebo plus daily oral erlotinib 150 mg. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat population. Secondary end points included median progression-free survival, overall response rate, biomarker analysis, and safety. Results A total of 499 patients were enrolled (onartuzumab, n = 250; placebo, n = 249). Median OS was 6.8 versus 9.1 months for onartuzumab versus placebo (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 1.27; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.65; P = .067), with a greater number of deaths in the onartuzumab arm (130 [52%] v 114 [46%]). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 versus 2.6 months (stratified HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.20; P = .92), and overall response rate was 8.4% and 9.6% for onartuzumab versus placebo, respectively. Exploratory analyses using MET fluorescence in situ hybridization status and gene expression showed no benefit for onartuzumab; patients with EGFR mutations showed a trend toward shorter OS with onartuzumab treatment (HR, 4.68; 95% CI, 0.97 to 22.63). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were reported by 56.0% and 51.2% of patients, with serious AEs in 33.9% and 30.7%, for experimental versus control arms, respectively. Conclusion Onartuzumab plus erlotinib did not improve clinical outcomes, with shorter OS in the onartuzumab arm, compared with erlotinib in patients with MET-positive non–small-cell lung cancer.

scholarly journals Phase III study of selpercatinib vs chemotherapy +/− pembrolizumab in untreated RET positive non-small-cell lung cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J Solomon ◽  
Cai Cun Zhou ◽  
Alexander Drilon ◽  
Keunchil Park ◽  
Jürgen Wolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Naïve

Selpercatinib, a novel, highly selective and potent, inhibitor of RET, demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in heavily pretreated and treatment-naive RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients in a Phase I/II clinical trial. LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944) is a randomized, global, multicenter, open-label, Phase III trial, evaluating selpercatinib versus carboplatin or cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with locally advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point is progression-free survival by independent review. Key secondary end points include overall survival, response rate, duration of response and progression-free survival. Clinical trial registration: NCT04194944 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin or Carboplatin, With or Without Cetuximab, As First-Line Therapy for Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (36) ◽  
pp. 5777-5784 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Butts ◽  
David Bodkin ◽  
Edward L. Middleman ◽  
Craig W. Englund ◽  
David Ellison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab added to first-line gemcitabine/platinum in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and MethodsIn this noncomparative, randomized trial, chemotherapy-naïve patients with recurrent/metastatic NSCLC (stage IV or stage IIIB with malignant pleural effusion) were eligible. Patients received cisplatin (75 mg/m2IV, every 3 weeks) or carboplatin (area under the concentration-versus-time curve of 5 intravenously [IV], every 3 weeks), and gemcitabine (1,250 or 1,000 mg/m2IV, days 1 and 8) plus cetuximab (400 mg/m2IV day 1, followed by 250 mg/m2weekly), in arm A, or chemotherapy alone, in arm B. Response rate was the primary end point; safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary end points.ResultsSixty-five patients were randomly assigned to arm A and 66 to arm B. Partial responses were observed in 18 patients (27.7%; 95% CI, 17.3 to 40.2) in arm A and 12 (18.2%; 95% CI, 9.8 to 29.6) in arm B. Median progression-free survival was 5.09 months for arm A (95% CI, 4.17 to 5.98) and 4.21 months (95% CI, 3.81 to 5.49) in arm B. Median overall survival was 11.99 months (95% CI, 8.80 to 15.18) and 9.26 months (95% CI, 7.43 to 11.79) in arms A and B, respectively. Overall toxicity was acceptable and consistent with the profiles of the individual agents.ConclusionFirst-line treatment with cetuximab plus gemcitabine/platinum is well tolerated and can be administered safely in patients with advanced NSCLC. Differences in response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival suggest that the addition of cetuximab to platinum/gemcitabine may improve clinical outcomes. Larger studies are in progress to address this hypothesis.

scholarly journals Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Alectinib Versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Tang ◽  
Longyu Jin ◽  
Zhang Zhang ◽  
Zhibin Jiang ◽  
Zeeshan Malik
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival

ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of alectinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small-cell lung cancer.MethodsStudies about the efficacy of alectinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Embase and the Cocharane Library from inception to February 15, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened these studies, extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias in the included studies by using the Cochrane risk assessment tool, and then used review manager 5.3 software for meta-analysis.ResultsThree studies comprising a total of 697 patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer were included, 380 in the alectinib group and 317 in the crizotinib group. The dose of alectinib (300 mg) in J-ALEX were lower than the approved dose (600 mg), however the crizotinib group in all three studies received the recommended dose (250 mg). Performance bias was high in all three studies whereas, and the attrition bias was high in two studies (Toyoaki Hida 2017 and Solange peters 2017). The results of meta-analysis showed that: the overall response rate [OR = 2.07, 95% CI (1.41, 3.06), P = 0.0002], the progression free survival [HR = 0.34, 95% CI (0.21, 0.55), P <0.0001], the partial response [OR = 1.71, 95% CI (1.19, 2.46), P = 0.003], P = 0.001], in alectinib group were higher than that of crizotinib group. Though the total number of events in complete response and the disease control rate were more in alectinib group than that of crizotinib group, the meta-analysis results shows no significant differences between two drugs in the disease control rate [OR = 2.24, 95% CI (0.56, 8.88), P = 0.25], the complete response [OR = 1.82, 95% CI (0.75, 4.45), P = 0.19]. In addition, the number of events in the stable disease [OR = 0.45, 95% CI (0.28, O.74), P = 0.001], and the adverse events [OR = 0.50, 95% CI (0.23, 0.81), P = <0.0001] in alectinib group were lower than that of crizotinib group.ConclusionAlectinib in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival and partial response is superior to crizotinib in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer and is well tolerated. Compared with crizotinib, alectinib is more effective than crizotinib and has a lower incidence of total adverse reactions. Meta-analysis results confirm the strong base for alectinib as a first-line treatment for ALK-positive NSCLC.

scholarly journals Brigatinib vs Alectinib in Crizotinib-Resistant Advanced Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ALTA-3)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjay Popat ◽  
Geoffrey Liu ◽  
Shun Lu ◽  
Gregory Song ◽  
Xin Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Anaplastic Lymphoma ◽  
End Point

Crizotinib is highly efficacious and more tolerable than chemotherapy for ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its progression-free survival benefit and intracranial efficacy have limitations. Head-to-head comparisons of next-generation ALK inhibitors in patients with ALK+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib will contribute toward optimizing survival. This international, Phase III, randomized, open-label study (ALTA-3) will therefore assign patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib to receive either brigatinib 180 mg qd (7-day lead-in at 90 mg qd) or alectinib 600 mg twice daily. The primary end point is progression-free survival as assessed by a blinded Independent Review Committee; the key secondary end point is overall survival. Trial registration number: NCT03596866  (ClinicalTrials.gov)

scholarly journals Efficacy of Single-site Radiotherapy Plus PD-1 Inhibitors vs PD-1 Inhibitors for Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peiliang Wang ◽  
Tianwen Yin ◽  
Kaikai Zhao ◽  
Jinming Yu ◽  
Feifei Teng
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Single Site ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Sites

Abstract Purpose: Growing numbers of clinical trials test the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but the number of irradiated sites is not uniform. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of single-site RT plus immunotherapy in oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with smaller disease burdens and low tumor heterogeneity. Methods: We retrospectively identified oligometastatic NSCLC (≤4 metastatic sites) patients treated with PD-1 pathway inhibitors with or without RT to a single lesion in our institution between 2018 and 2020. The primary endpoints were the best objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) . Results: Of the 152 patients enrolled, 93 and 59 were identified as the ICI alone group and the ICI plus RT group, respectively. The addition of radiotherapy to ICI therapy significant increased the best ORR from 31.2% to 50.8%, p=0.015). The out-of-field (abscopal`) response rate could reach 41.3% (95% CI, 26.5%-56.1%) in the ICI plus RT group. Median progression-free survival was 8.9 months (95%CI, 4.7-13.1 months) with ICI alone versus 13.8 months (95% CI, 9.5-18.1 months) with ICI plus radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.568; p=0.035). In an exploratory subgroup analysis of PFS, the addition of RT brought greater benefits in patients with aged <65 years (p=0.016), patients with ECOG PS=0 (p=0.048), patients with 1-2 metastatic sites (p=0.024). No unexpected adverse events or significantly increased toxicities were observed in the experimental arm.Conclusion: Single-site RT plus anti-PD-1 inhibitors significantly increased systemic responses and improved survival outcomes in oligometastatic NSCLC patients.

scholarly journals Osimertinib in Advanced EGFR-T790M Mutation-positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated Within the Special Use Medication Program in Spain. OSIREX-spanish Lung Cancer Group

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariano Provencio ◽  
Josefa Terrasa ◽  
Pilar Garrido ◽  
Rosario García Campelo ◽  
Francisco Aparisi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Egfr T790m

Abstract Background: AURA study reported 61% objective response rate and progression-free survival of 9.6 months with osimertinib in patients with EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer. Due to lack of real-world data, we proposed this study to describe the experience with osimertinib in Spain.Methods: Post-authorization, non-interventional Special Use Medication Program, multicenter, retrospective study in advanced EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer. 155 patients were enrolled (August 2016-December 2018) from 30 sites. Primary objective: progression-free survival. Secondary objectives: toxicity profile, objective response rate, and use of health service resources.Results: 70% women, median age 66. 63.9% were non-smokers and 99% had adenocarcinoma. Most had received at least one prior treatment (97%), 91.7% had received previous EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors and 2.8% osimertinib as first-line treatment. At data cutoff, median follow-up was 11.8 months. 155 patients were evaluable for response, 1.3% complete response, 40.7% partial response, 31% stable disease and 11.6% progressive disease. Objective response rate was 42%. Median progression-free survival was 9.4 months. 49% reported an adverse event, the majority of which (78%) were grade 1 or 2. The resource cost study indicates early use is warranted. Conclusion: This study to assess the real-world clinical impact of osimertinib showed high drug activity in pretreated advanced EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer, with manageable adverse events.Clinical trial registration number: NCT03790397

Phase III trial of thoracic irradiation with or without cisplatin for locally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer: a Hoosier Oncology Group protocol.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1425-1429 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Blanke ◽  
R Ansari ◽  
R Mantravadi ◽  
R Gonin ◽  
R Tokars ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival

PURPOSE Here we report the results of a phase III study, to evaluate whether the addition of cisplatin to radiation therapy (XRT) would improve progression-free survival or overall survival for patients with locally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred forty patients with biopsy-proven unresectable NSCLC without distant metastases or lower-stage medically inoperable patients were randomized to one of two treatment arms. Arm A consisted of thoracic XRT alone, 60 to 65 Gy total tumor dose in daily fractions of 1.80 to 2.00 Gy; and arm B consisted of identical XRT with the addition of cisplatin 70 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for three cycles beginning on the first day of irradiation. RESULTS Two hundred fifteen patients were eligible and assessable. The overall response rate was 50% on the combination arm versus 38% on the XRT-alone arm (P = .076). The median progression-free survival time was 23 versus 22 weeks, respectively (P = .0537). The median survival time was 43 weeks on the combination arm versus 46 weeks on the XRT arm (Poverall = .3469). The 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 43%, 18%, and 5% on the combination arm versus 45% 13%, and 2% on the XRT arm, respectively. CONCLUSION Cisplatin, administered every 3 weeks, does not significantly improve response rate, progression-free survival, or overall survival when added to thoracic XRT for locally advanced unresectable NSCLC.

scholarly journals Osimertinib in advanced EGFR-T790M mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer patients treated within the Special Use Medication Program in Spain: OSIREX-Spanish Lung Cancer Group

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariano Provencio ◽  
Josefa Terrasa ◽  
Pilar Garrido ◽  
Rosario García Campelo ◽  
Francisco Aparisi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Egfr T790m

Abstract Background AURA study reported 61% objective response rate and progression-free survival of 9.6 months with osimertinib in patients with EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer. Due to lack of real-world data, we proposed this study to describe the experience with osimertinib in Spain. Methods Post-authorization, non-interventional Special Use Medication Program, multicenter, retrospective study in advanced EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer. One hundred-fifty five patients were enrolled (August 2016–December 2018) from 30 sites. Primary objective: progression-free survival. Secondary objectives: toxicity profile, objective response rate, and use of health service resources. Results 70% women, median age 66. 63.9% were non-smokers and 99% had adenocarcinoma. Most patients had received at least one prior treatment (97%), 91.7% had received previous EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors and 2.8% osimertinib as first-line treatment. At data cutoff, median follow-up was 11.8 months. One hundred-fifty five patients were evaluable for response, 1.3% complete response, 40.6% partial response, 31% stable disease and 11.6% disease progression. Objective response rate was 42%. Median progression-free survival was 9.4 months. Of the 155 patients who received treatment, 76 (49%) did not reported any adverse event, 51% presented some adverse event, most of which were grade 1 or 2. The resource cost study indicates early use is warranted. Conclusion This study to assess the real-world clinical impact of osimertinib showed high drug activity in pretreated advanced EGFR/T790M+ non-small cell lung cancer, with manageable adverse events. Trial registration Clinical trial registration number:NCT03790397.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document