Virtual Library

 x 
My Library Virtual Library FAQ

Start Your Search

C.A. Butts



Author of

  • +

    O02 - NSCLC - Combined Modality Therapy I (ID 111)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Oral Abstract Session
    • Track: Combined Modality
    • Presentations: 2
    • +

      O02.01 - Geographic differences in the combined-modality treatment of stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer: Results from a global phase III trial of tecemotide (L-BLP25) (ID 2712)

      10:30 - 10:40  |  Author(s): C.A. Butts

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background
      Chemo-radiotherapy (chemo/RT) is the standard of care for patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but little is known about differences in clinical practice between regions of the world. The START trial is a global phase III trial of the MUC1-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide (L-BLP25), for which key efficacy and safety results have been reported previously. Here we report regional differences in diagnostic procedures and treatment of stage III NSCLC prior to enrolment in START.

      Methods
      The START trial recruited patients (performance status 0/1) with unresectable stage III NSCLC who had not progressed within 28–84 days of completing ≥2 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy with concurrent or sequential radiotherapy (≥50 Gy). Baseline characteristics, diagnostic procedures and the initial chemo/RT administered of those recruited were compared between centers in different regions.

      Results
      From Jan 2007 to Nov 2011, 1513 patients were recruited at >250 centers in 33 countries: Western Europe 40.3%, Eastern Europe 26.0%, North America 21.8%, Latin America 5.7%, Asia 3.4%, Australia 2.8%. The majority of patients (92.1%) were Caucasian and median age was 61 years. Overall, 6.3% of patients were never-smokers with little inter-regional variation except for Asia (31.4%). The proportion of current smokers upon entry into the trial was highest in Eastern Europe (36.3%) and lowest in Australia (11.6%). Median tobacco consumption by region ranged from 36.2 (Eastern Europe) to 53.6 (Latin America) pack-years. The proportion of patients considered for the START trial who received concurrent rather than sequential chemo/RT varied widely between regions and was highest in North America and Australia, lower in Western Europe, Latin America and Asia, and lowest in Eastern Europe. There were also substantial variations in the diagnostic procedures between the regions, although pathological confirmation of N-status was infrequent in all regions. Detailed results by region for the time from diagnosis to randomization, duration of chemo- and radiotherapy, and chemotherapy agents used will be presented.

      Proportion of patients (%) with:
      Use of concurrent chemo/RT N-status determined with PET or PET/CT N-status determined with mediastinoscopy
      Australia (n=43) 100 74.4 2.3
      North America (n=330) 92.7 37.9 18.5
      Asia (n=51) 66.7 21.5 2.0
      Latin America (n=86) 65.1 7.0 5.8
      Western Europe (n=609) 67.2 32.2 6.9
      Eastern Europe (n=394) 28.9 7.3 3.6

      Conclusion
      Baseline data from the START trial suggest substantial variations in the management of unresectable stage III NSCLC between different regions of the world. While recruited patients from North American and Australian centers mostly received concurrent chemo/RT in accordance with current recommendations, a substantial proportion of patients in Europe, Latin America and Asia received sequential chemo/RT. More frequent use of concurrent chemo/RT as the recommended standard of care should be made across geographic regions.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

    • +

      O02.02 - Tecemotide (L-BLP25) in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer in the phase III START study: Further endpoint and exploratory biomarker results (ID 2779)

      10:40 - 10:50  |  Author(s): C.A. Butts

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background
      The phase III START study evaluated the mucin 1 (MUC1) antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide (L-BLP25) vs. placebo in patients with stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who did not progress following initial chemo-radiotherapy (chemo/RT). The primary objective of overall survival (OS) prolongation was not met, however, pre-defined subgroup analyses revealed a clinically meaningful prolongation of survival with tecemotide in patients previously treated with concurrent chemo/RT (p=0.016). Sensitivity analyses suggested the observed treatment effect may have been under-estimated due to a clinical hold, which resulted in a median suspension of recruitment and investigational treatment of about 4.4 months. Tecemotide was well tolerated and no safety concerns were identified.

      Methods
      From January 2007 to November 2011, 1513 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC and stable disease or objective response following initial chemo/RT were randomized (2:1, double-blind) to subcutaneous tecemotide (806 µg lipopeptide) or placebo, weekly for 8 weeks and then 6-weekly until disease progression or withdrawal. A single dose of cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2) or saline was given 3 days prior to first tecemotide/placebo dose. Primary endpoint, OS, and secondary endpoints progression-free-survival (PFS) and time-to-treatment-failure (TTF) used a Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusting for randomization strata. While RECIST 1.0 had to be observed for determination of disease progression, there was no formal imaging schedule to determine disease progression; this was done according to institutional practice. Exploratory analyses were done for treatment interaction for HLA-A02, -DRB4 and -B08. Baseline peripheral blood anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), serum MUC1 (sMUC1), lymphocyte count and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (NLR) currently are being explored.

      Results
      The primary analysis population (N=1239) was defined prospectively to account for the clinical hold and prospectively excluded 274 patients randomized within 6 months prior to onset of the hold. Median PFS was 9.6 months with tecemotide vs. 7.7 months with placebo (HR 0.865, 95%CI 0.755–0.990, p=0.036). In keeping with OS data, tecemotide treatment effects on PFS were more pronounced in patients treated with concurrent chemo/RT (N=806; HR 0.826, 95%CI 0.696–0.980, p=0.029) vs. sequential chemo/RT (N=433; HR 0.947, 95%CI 0.756–1.187, p=0.638). Median TTF was 8.9 months with tecemotide vs. 7.2 months with placebo (HR 0.887, 95%CI 0.777–1.012, p=0.075). A prolongation of TTF with tecemotide was seen in patients with prior concurrent chemo/RT (HR 0.844, 95%CI 0.715–0.996, p=0.045), which was absent in the subgroup with prior sequential chemo/RT (HR 0.977, 95%CI 0.784–1.217, p=0.835). Detailed biomarker results will be presented.

      Conclusion
      While the primary endpoint of prolongation of OS was not met, secondary endpoints PFS and TTF support the previously-reported finding of a more favorable effect of tecemotide in patients treated with concurrent but not sequential chemo/RT. Any potential further clinical investigation of tecemotide in locally advanced NSCLC should focus on patients following concurrent chemo/RT therapy.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    P1.11 - Poster Session 1 - NSCLC Novel Therapies (ID 208)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Poster Session
    • Track: Medical Oncology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P1.11-020 - Economic Analysis of TORCH: Erlotinib versus Cisplatin and Gemcitabine as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (ID 1645)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): C.A. Butts

      • Abstract

      Background
      The TORCH (“Tarceva or Chemotherapy”) randomized phase III trial demonstrated that first-line erlotinib followed by second-line cisplatin-gemcitabine (N=380) compared to cisplatin/gemcitabine followed by erlotinib (N=380) in unselected advanced NSCLC patients yielded inferior survival, without major differences in first-line global quality of life. We determined the incremental costs and utility between arms, including in the EGFR mutation positive subgroup (N=39).

      Methods
      Direct medical resource utilization data and EQ5D scores were collected prospectively during the trial. Mean survival and quality-adjusted survival per arm were calculated for the entire study population and the subgroup with documented EGFR mutations. The analysis was conducted from the Canadian public health perspective, using a lifetime horizon. Costs for medications, outpatient visits, investigations and toxicity management including hospitalization were determined, and presented in 2012 Canadian dollars (CAD). The primary outcomes of the analysis included costs and outcomes per treatment arm, and the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained in the EGFR mutation positive subgroup.

      Results
      The costs per patient in the chemotherapy were higher than in the erlotinib arm, with an incremental mean cost of $4,190 CAD. This was related to longer duration of chemotherapy treatment, associated with higher drug and outpatient visit costs. Higher costs from hospitalization and adverse event management were seen in the erlotinib arm, likely related to disease progression. Mean overall survival in the entire study population was longer in the chemotherapy arm , although mean quality-adjusted survival was similar (0.82 QALY in chemotherapy arm and 0.87 in erlotinib arm). In the EGFR mutation positive subgroup, mean survival was slightly higher in the chemotherapy arm, but quality-adjusted survival was longer in the erlotinib arm (1.19 QALYs versus 1.08 QALYs with chemotherapy). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for first-line erlotinib compared to chemotherapy in the EGFR mutation positive subgroup was $32,916 CAD per QALY.

      Conclusion
      While first-line platinum doublet chemotherapy remains the standard for unselected advanced NSCLC patients, first-line erlotinib appears to be cost effective in the EGFR mutation positive subgroup. This supports routine EGFR genotyping to select first-line therapy in advanced NSCLC, and targeted EGFR TKI therapy for those with EGFR mutation positive NSCLC.

  • +

    P2.11 - Poster Session 2 - NSCLC Novel Therapies (ID 209)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Poster Session
    • Track: Medical Oncology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P2.11-042 - Acid suppression therapy impairs Erlotinib efficacy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (ID 2930)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): C.A. Butts

      • Abstract

      Background
      Erlotinib is a key treatment option in all advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) subtypes regardless of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status. Despite side effect advantages over cytotoxic chemotherapy, a shortcoming of erlotinib is pH-dependent absorption. Recent evidence highlights this inconsistency further by showing reduced plasma levels of various oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in the presence of acid suppression therapy. Given the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and diseases that use acid suppression, goals of this study are to determine if coadministration of acid suppressants and erlotinib affected clinical outcomes in advanced NSCLC patients.

      Methods
      A cohort of patients with mNSCLC from 2007-2012 who received erlotinib through our institution was retrospectively reviewed. In addition to stage, age, gender, performance status, and NSCLC subtype, patients were then identified as receiving acid suppression (AS) if their pharmacy records included either proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine blockers (anti-H2). Patients were considered taking these medications concomitantly if dates for acid suppressants overlapped their erlotinib prescription by ≥ 20% of the treatment duration. Patients who received erlotinib for ≥ 1 week were analyzed for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

      Results
      544 stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were identified. Of those, 507 were eligible for review. Median age was 64 years, gender 235 male, and 272 female. By subtype, 318 were adenocarcinoma, 106 squamous, 43 poorly differentiated, 11 large cell, and 29 not otherwise specified (NOS). 124 patients received concomitant AS therapy with the most common type being PPIs. Analysis unselected for EGFR mutational status yielded median PFS and OS in the AS versus no-AS group as 1.4 v 2.3 months (p<0.001) and 12.9 v 16.8 months (p=0.003), respectively. In multivariate analysis with gender, NSCLC subtype, and performance status, Cox proportional hazards ratios for PFS and OS for AS and non-AS groups were 1.83 (95% CI 1.48-2.25) and 1.37 (95% CI 1.11-1.69) respectively. Subgroup analysis by subtype in the AS and non-AS groups was significant in the following types (p<0.05): adenocarcinoma, PFS 1.8 v 2.7 months, OS 13.2 v 17.5 months; squamous PFS 1.5 v 2.3 months, OS 13.4 v 15.9 months; poorly differentiated PFS 0.8 v 2.0 months, OS 7.6 v 15.5 months, and NOS PFS 1.2 v 1.7 months, OS 10.8 v 14.5 months. Effects of AS in EGFR mutated patients are being studied.

      Conclusion
      Despite limitations of retrospective analyses, this large population based study demonstrates erlotinib efficacy is dependent on gastric acidity and OS can be adversely affected. This is the first study the authors are aware of that demonstrates an impact on clinical outcomes by co-administration of acid suppression and TKI therapy. Caution should be taken with co-administration of other TKIs and acid suppressive therapy.

  • +

    P3.11 - Poster Session 3 - NSCLC Novel Therapies (ID 211)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Poster Session
    • Track: Medical Oncology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P3.11-039 - Exploration of patient health status as measured by the generic preference-based questionnaire EQ-5D alongside the START trial of tecemotide (L-BLP25) in non-small cell lung cancer (ID 2744)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): C.A. Butts

      • Abstract

      Background
      Tecemotide (L-BLP25) is a mucin 1 (MUC1) antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy investigated in patients not progressing after primary chemo-radiotherapy for stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the phase III START study. The objective of this analysis was to explore patients’ health status alongside the study.

      Methods
      From January 2007 to November 2011, 1513 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC that did not progress after chemo-radiotherapy (platinum-based chemotherapy and ≥50 Gy) were randomized (2:1; double-blind) to tecemotide (806 μg lipopeptide) or placebo SC weekly x 8 then Q6 weeks until disease progression or withdrawal. The analysis population (n=1239) was defined prospectively to account for a clinical hold of the study. The impact on patient health status was assessed as an exploratory endpoint using the EuroQoL 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), a widely used generic preference-based questionnaire covering 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression). EQ-5D index score can be calculated for which perfect health is given a value of 1 and death a value of 0. EQ-5D was collected at baseline, weeks 2, 5 and 8 and then every 6 weeks until end of treatment (EOT) visit (i.e. at time of disease progression), the EOT visit and every 12 weeks afterwards. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was carried out to explore the change of EQ-5D index score over time in the overall population for patients on treatment. The change of EQ-5D to EOT visit was also estimated. Change of EQ-5D index score was explored using all data (i.e. collected both before and after EOT visit) using a linear growth curve model, with random intercept and slope, considering time as a continuous variable.

      Results
      EQ-5D compliance rates (percentage of patients still in the study who completed the questionnaire) were consistently above 85% for all visits of the treatment period in both treatment arms. Mean baseline EQ-5D score was 0.79 (sd=0.19) for both tecemotide and placebo arms. The results from ANCOVA on the overall population did not show any significant difference between the two arms during the treatment phase. Change in the EQ-5D index score from baseline to EOT visit was –0.102 (95%CI: –0.134, –0.071) for tecemotide and –0.136 (95%CI: –0.177, –0.095) for placebo. The linear growth model including the EQ-5D assessments before and after EOT showed that the EQ-5D index score decreased significantly over time in both treatment arms, but that the decrease was slightly slower in the tecemotide than in the placebo arm: –0.0076 per month in tecemotide patients vs. –0.01 in placebo (p=0.0498).

      Conclusion
      During treatment, there was no statistical difference in health status with tecemotide vs. placebo. This supports the good tolerability profile of tecemotide, with a lack of significant toxicity as compared to placebo. Disease progression was associated with a notable deterioration of patient health status, regardless of the treatment. Considering data from both before and after disease progression, patients’ health status appeared to worsen slightly over time, at a slower rate for patients treated with tecemotide.