Tarceva With or Without Apatinib in the Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma
Citations
All
Search in:AllTitleAbstractAuthor name
Publications
(11)
Patents
Grants
Pathways
Clinical trials
Publication
Journal: CA - A Cancer Journal for Clinicians
March/10/2014
Abstract
Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data were collected by the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. A total of 1,665,540 new cancer cases and 585,720 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States in 2014. During the most recent 5 years for which there are data (2006-2010), delay-adjusted cancer incidence rates declined slightly in men (by 0.6% per year) and were stable in women, while cancer death rates decreased by 1.8% per year in men and by 1.4% per year in women. The combined cancer death rate (deaths per 100,000 population) has been continuously declining for 2 decades, from a peak of 215.1 in 1991 to 171.8 in 2010. This 20% decline translates to the avoidance of approximately 1,340,400 cancer deaths (952,700 among men and 387,700 among women) during this time period. The magnitude of the decline in cancer death rates from 1991 to 2010 varies substantially by age, race, and sex, ranging from no decline among white women aged 80 years and older to a 55% decline among black men aged 40 years to 49 years. Notably, black men experienced the largest drop within every 10-year age group. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population.
Pulse
Views:
46
Posts:
No posts
Rating:
Not rated
Publication
Journal: New England Journal of Medicine
September/8/2009
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Previous, uncontrolled studies have suggested that first-line treatment with gefitinib would be efficacious in selected patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.
METHODS
In this phase 3, open-label study, we randomly assigned previously untreated patients in East Asia who had advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma and who were nonsmokers or former light smokers to receive gefitinib (250 mg per day) (609 patients) or carboplatin (at a dose calculated to produce an area under the curve of 5 or 6 mg per milliliter per minute) plus paclitaxel (200 mg per square meter of body-surface area) (608 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival.
RESULTS
The 12-month rates of progression-free survival were 24.9% with gefitinib and 6.7% with carboplatin-paclitaxel. The study met its primary objective of showing the noninferiority of gefitinib and also showed its superiority, as compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel, with respect to progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). In the subgroup of 261 patients who were positive for the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received gefitinib than among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.64; P<0.001), whereas in the subgroup of 176 patients who were negative for the mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death with gefitinib, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.05 to 3.98; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were rash or acne (in 66.2% of patients) and diarrhea (46.6%) in the gefitinib group and neurotoxic effects (69.9%), neutropenia (67.1%), and alopecia (58.4%) in the carboplatin-paclitaxel group.
CONCLUSIONS
Gefitinib is superior to carboplatin-paclitaxel as an initial treatment for pulmonary adenocarcinoma among nonsmokers or former light smokers in East Asia. The presence in the tumor of a mutation of the EGFR gene is a strong predictor of a better outcome with gefitinib. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00322452.)
Pulse
Views:
4
Posts:
No posts
Rating:
Not rated
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Oncology
October/4/2011
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Activating mutations in EGFR are important markers of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The OPTIMAL study compared efficacy and tolerability of the TKI erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.
METHODS
We undertook an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 22 centres in China. Patients older than 18 years with histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a confirmed activating mutation of EGFR (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R point mutation) received either oral erlotinib (150 mg/day) until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects, or up to four cycles of gemcitabine plus carboplatin. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a minimisation procedure and were stratified according to EGFR mutation type, histological subtype (adenocarcinoma vs non-adenocarcinoma), and smoking status. The primary outcome was progression-free survival, analysed in patients with confirmed disease who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00874419, and has completed enrolment; patients are still in follow-up.
RESULTS
83 patients were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 82 to receive gemcitabine plus carboplatin; 82 in the erlotinib group and 72 in the chemotherapy group were included in analysis of the primary endpoint. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in erlotinib-treated patients than in those on chemotherapy (13.1 [95% CI 10.58-16.53] vs 4.6 [4.21-5.42] months; hazard ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.10-0.26; p<0.0001). Chemotherapy was associated with more grade 3 or 4 toxic effects than was erlotinib (including neutropenia in 30 [42%] of 72 patients and thrombocytopenia in 29 [40%] patients on chemotherapy vs no patients with either event on erlotinib); the most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effects with erlotinib were increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations (three [4%] of 83 patients) and skin rash (two [2%] patients). Chemotherapy was also associated with increased treatment-related serious adverse events (ten [14%] of 72 patients [decreased platelet count, n=8; decreased neutrophil count, n=1; hepatic dysfunction, n=1] vs two [2%] of 83 patients [both hepatic dysfunction]).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with standard chemotherapy, erlotinib conferred a significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and was associated with more favourable tolerability. These findings suggest that erlotinib is important for first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.
BACKGROUND
F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd (China); Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality.
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Oncology
January/26/2015
Abstract
BACKGROUND
With use of EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor monotherapy for patients with activating EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), median progression-free survival has been extended to about 12 months. Nevertheless, new strategies are needed to further extend progression-free survival and overall survival with acceptable toxicity and tolerability for this population. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab compared with erlotinib alone in patients with non-squamous NSCLC with activating EGFR mutation-positive disease.
METHODS
In this open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 2 study, patients from 30 centres across Japan with stage IIIB/IV or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and no previous chemotherapy for advanced disease received erlotinib 150 mg/day plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks or erlotinib 150 mg/day monotherapy as a first-line therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as determined by an independent review committee. Randomisation was done with a dynamic allocation method, and the analysis used a modified intention-to-treat approach, including all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and had tumour assessment at least once after randomisation. This study is registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center, number JapicCTI-111390.
RESULTS
Between Feb 21, 2011, and March 5, 2012, 154 patients were enrolled. 77 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and bevacizumab and 77 to erlotinib alone, of whom 75 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group and 77 in the erlotinib alone group were included in the efficacy analyses. Median progression-free survival was 16·0 months (95% CI 13·9-18·1) with erlotinib plus bevacizumab and 9·7 months (5·7-11·1) with erlotinib alone (hazard ratio 0·54, 95% CI 0·36-0·79; log-rank test p=0·0015). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were rash (19 [25%] patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group vs 15 [19%] patients in the erlotinib alone group), hypertension (45 [60%] vs eight [10%]), and proteinuria (six [8%] vs none). Serious adverse events occurred at a similar frequency in both groups (18 [24%] patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group and 19 [25%] patients in the erlotinib alone group).
CONCLUSIONS
Erlotinib plus bevacizumab combination could be a new first-line regimen in EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Further investigation of the regimen is warranted.
BACKGROUND
Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
November/21/2013
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Patients with metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) who do not respond to or who experience progression with second-line chemotherapy have no treatment options that clearly confer a survival benefit. This trial investigated the safety and efficacy of apatinib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, as a treatment option for heavily pretreated patients with mGC.
METHODS
Patients who experienced treatment failure with at least two chemotherapeutic regimens were randomly assigned to receive placebo (group A), apatinib 850 mg once daily (group B), or apatinib 425 mg twice daily (group C).
RESULTS
We enrolled 144 patients onto this study. In groups A, B, and C, the median overall survival (OS) times were 2.50 months (95% CI, 1.87 to 3.70 months), 4.83 months (95% CI, 4.03 to 5.97 months), and 4.27 months (95% CI, 3.83 to 4.77 months), respectively, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) times were 1.40 months (95% CI, 1.20 to 1.83 months), 3.67 months (95% CI, 2.17 to 6.80 months), and 3.20 months (95% CI, 2.37 to 4.53 months), respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the apatinib and placebo groups for both PFS (P < .001) and OS (P < .001 and P = .0017). Nine patients had a partial response (three patients in group B and six patients in group C). Toxicities were tolerable or could be clinically managed. The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome and hypertension. Hematologic toxicities were moderate, and grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities were rare.
CONCLUSIONS
Apatinib showed improved PFS and OS in heavily pretreated patients with mGC who had experienced treatment failure with two or more chemotherapy regimens.
Publication
Journal: International Journal of Cancer
September/28/2014
Abstract
Apatinib is an oral, highly potent tyrosine-kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR2. Phase I study showed the recommended dose of 750 mg/day with substantial antitumor activity. This phase II study aims to evaluate the optimum dose level for the efficacy and safety of apatinib monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in China. Phase IIa was first performed among 25 patients previously treated with anthracycline and/or taxane. All patients received apatinib 750 mg/day p.o. in a 4-week cycle. Subsequently, a phase IIb study of 59 patients was activated, with the endpoint progression-free survival (PFS). The dosage of drug for the Phase IIb was determined according to safety, tolerability and efficacy from the phase IIa study. As a result of toxicity associated with the 750 mg dose in phase IIa, the recommended initial dose of apatinib in the phase IIb was 500 mg/day. In phase IIb, grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities were thrombocytopenia (13.6%), leukopenia (6.8%), neutropenia (3.4%) and anemia (1.7%). The most frequent grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were hand-foot syndrome, proteinuria, hypertension, and increased ALT. In the 56 evaluable patients, overall response rate and clinical benefit rate (CBR) were 10.7 and 25.0%, respectively. Median PFS and overall survival were 3.3 (95% CI 1.7-5.0) and 10.6 (95% CI 5.6-15.7) months, respectively. Our results indicate that apatinib dose of 500 mg rather than 750 mg is the recommended starting dose for the heavily pretreated mTNBC patients with measurable rate of partial response and PFS.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
August/22/2012
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Sunitinib plus erlotinib may enhance antitumor activity compared with either agent alone in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), based on the importance of the signaling pathways involved in tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis. This phase III trial investigated overall survival (OS) for sunitinib plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in patients with refractory NSCLC.
METHODS
Patients previously treated with one to two chemotherapy regimens (including one platinum-based regimen) for recurrent NSCLC, and for whom erlotinib was indicated, were randomly assigned (1:1) to sunitinib 37.5 mg/d plus erlotinib 150 mg/d or to placebo plus erlotinib 150 mg/d, stratified by prior bevacizumab use, smoking history, and epidermal growth factor receptor expression. The primary end point was OS. Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.
RESULTS
In all, 960 patients were randomly assigned, and baseline characteristics were balanced. Median OS was 9.0 months for sunitinib plus erlotinib versus 8.5 months for erlotinib alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.922; 95% CI, 0.797 to 1.067; one-sided stratified log-rank P = .1388). Median PFS was 3.6 months versus 2.0 months (HR, 0.807; 95% CI, 0.695 to 0.937; one-sided stratified log-rank P = .0023), and ORR was 10.6% versus 6.9% (two-sided stratified log-rank P = .0471), respectively. Treatment-related toxicities of grade 3 or higher, including rash/dermatitis, diarrhea, and asthenia/fatigue were more frequent in the sunitinib plus erlotinib arm.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with refractory NSCLC, sunitinib plus erlotinib did not improve OS compared with erlotinib alone, but the combination was associated with a statistically significantly longer PFS and greater ORR. The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicities was greater with combination therapy.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
August/22/2011
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, has shown preliminary activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with erlotinib with or without sorafenib in this multicenter phase II trial.
METHODS
Key eligibility criteria included the following: stage IIIB or IV NSCLC; one to two prior regimens; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2; and measurable disease. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to sorafenib (400 mg orally twice a day) plus erlotinib (150 mg orally daily) or placebo plus erlotinib and stratified by squamous/nonsquamous histology and prior bevacizumab. Treatment efficacy, measured by progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR), was compared. Treatment of 168 patients allowed detection of 40% improvement in the historical PFS of 2.2 months with single-agent erlotinib.
RESULTS
One hundred sixty-eight patients enrolled from February 2008 to February 2009. Clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. ORRs for sorafenib/erlotinib and placebo/erlotinib were 8% and 11%, respectively (P = .56); disease control rates were 54% and 38%, respectively (P = .056). Median PFS was 3.38 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 1.94 months for placebo/erlotinib (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.22; P = .196). Seventy-two patients consented to analyses of tumor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In 67 patients with EGFR wild-type (WT) tumors, median PFS was 3.38 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 1.77 months for placebo/erlotinib (P = .018); median overall survival (OS) was 8 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 4.5 months for placebo/erlotinib (P = .019). An OS advantage for sorafenib/erlotinib was suggested among 43 patients with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) EGFR-negative tumors (P = .064). Both regimens were tolerable, with modest toxicity increase with sorafenib.
CONCLUSIONS
Although there was little difference in ORR or PFS, subset analyses in EGFR WT and EGFR FISH-negative patients suggest a benefit for the combination of erlotinib/sorafenib compared with single-agent erlotinib with respect to PFS and OS.
Publication
Journal: Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology
January/18/2015
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent, are promising therapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our study was aimed to determine whether there were conditions under which the addition of bevacizumab would enhance the antitumor activity of erlotinib against NSCLC tumors in vitro and in vivo.
METHODS
MTS was for NSCLC cell (PC9, 11-18, H1975, H157, H460 and A549) growth assay in vitro. ELISA was for VEGF protein assay in cells and tumor tissues. Mouse xenograft models were established with H157, H460 and A549 with primary resistance to erlotinib and treated with erlotinib plus bevacizumab or each agent alone. Erlotinib concentrations in tumors were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography.
RESULTS
Bevacizumab alone did not inhibit NSCLC cell growth in vitro. In primarily erlotinib-resistant NSCLC cells, the levels of VEGF protein were highest in H157 cell followed in order by H460 and A549 cells. In vivo, bevacizumab alone significantly inhibited tumor growth only in xenograft models with high (H157) and/or moderate (H460) levels of VEGF protein. A combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab partially reversed resistance to erlotinib in H157 xenografts (high VEGF level) with increasing intratumoral erlotinib concentrations, but not in H460 (moderate) or A549 (low) xenografts.
CONCLUSIONS
These results support that combined with anti-VEGF therapy could enhance antitumor activity of anti-EGFR therapy and/or partially reverse resistance to EGFR TKI, by increasing EGFR TKI concentration in specific tumors that express high levels of VEGF protein.
Publication
Journal: Current Opinion in Oncology
April/7/2011
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The majority of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) present with locally advanced mediastinal disease. Radiation therapy is the backbone, and nowadays a combination with chemotherapy is considered standard treatment. In this review we present a short history of the developments in this field with an update of all new developments. We address the questions how to optimally combine chemotherapy, targeted agents and radiation therapy.
RESULTS
The results from recently published papers dealing with combined chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and the data of two meta-analyses are reviewed. Some drugs are very suitable candidates for CRT such as cisplatin, pemetrexed and etoposide, whereas others should be avoided or used with caution (adriamycin, gemcitabine).
CONCLUSIONS
Our evaluation indicates that there are quite a number of positive developments in the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC but there is still much to improve. Variables such as patient condition, tumor biology, dose of radiation therapy, method of application (intensity modulated radiation therapy, four-dimensional planning) and dose of chemotherapy all influence treatment outcome and should be taken into account in designing the best treatment. Well-defined studies should be undertaken balancing the possible positive effect of therapy and toxicity.
Publication
Journal: PLoS ONE
April/12/2016
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Whether 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.
METHODS
EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42014015015).
RESULTS
Nine 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).
CONCLUSIONS
Combination 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.