Virtual Library

 x 
My Library Virtual Library FAQ

Start Your Search

T. Mok



Author of

  • +

    MO07 - NSCLC - Targeted Therapies II (ID 114)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Mini Oral Abstract Session
    • Track: Medical Oncology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      MO07.13 - Efficacy of afatinib vs. chemotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring activating EGFR mutations with or without metastatic brain disease (ID 1923)

      17:25 - 17:30  |  Author(s): T. Mok

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background
      Afatinib, an irreversible ErbB Family Blocker, was superior to pemetrexed/cisplatin in previously untreated patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a global Phase III trial, LUX-Lung 3. In patients with the two most common EGFR mutations (Del19, L858R) median progression-free survival (PFS) was 13.6 vs. 6.9 months (HR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.34–0.65; p<0.0001). Here we present the results for subgroups of patients with or without brain metastases (BM) with NSCLC harbouring common EGFR mutations.

      Methods
      In LUX-Lung 3 EGFR mutation-positive patients were randomized 2:1 to afatinib 40 mg daily or up to 6 cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin at standard doses. Patients with stable BM (asymptomatic, stable >4 weeks with no treatment required) were allowed. Presence of BM was documented by the investigator during screening. Tumour assessments were performed every 6 weeks until 48 weeks and every 12 weeks thereafter until progression, and reviewed independently and by the investigator.

      Results
      308 patients with common EGFR mutations were randomized (afatinib: 204, pemetrexed/cisplatin: 104), including 35 with baseline BM (afatinib: 20, pemetrexed/cisplatin: 15). Of these, Del19 mutation was detected in 11 (afatinib) and 8 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) patients and L858R in 9 (afatinib) and 7 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) patients. The baseline characteristics of patients with or without BM were comparable (females: 74% vs. 66%, median age: 61 vs. 62 years, ECOG 0: 31% vs. 41%, median time since diagnosis: 1.2 vs. 1.1 months, respectively). Within the BM group, baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms with the exception of ECOG 1; 80% of afatinib-treated patients had ECOG 1 compared with 53% of those treated with pemetrexed/cisplatin. Median PFS by independent review was 13.7 (afatinib) vs. 8.1 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) months in patients without BM (HR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.33–0.68; p<0.0001), and 11.1 (afatinib) vs. 5.4 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) months in patients with BM (HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.22–1.23; p=0.13). Objective response in patients without BM was 59% (afatinib) vs. 23% (pemetrexed/cisplatin), odds ratio=4.8, p<0.0001, and 70% (afatinib) vs. 20% (pemetrexed/cisplatin), odds ratio=11.0, p=0.007, in patients with BM. Investigator review showed a median PFS of 13.6 (afatinib) vs. 6.9 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) months in patients without BM (HR=0.38, 95% CI: 0.27–0.53; p<0.0001), and 6.7 (afatinib) vs. 5.4 (pemetrexed/cisplatin) months in those with BM (HR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.29–1.57; p=0.36). By investigator review, progressive disease in the brain was observed for 4.2% (7/167) and 3.7% (3/82) of patients without BM at baseline for afatinib and pemetrexed/cisplatin, respectively. All but one of these patients (on afatinib) had intracranial progression only. The median (range) time to progression in the brain in this small group was 11.6 (1.3, 20.2) months (afatinib) and 5.5 (2.6, 8.2) months (pemetrexed/cisplatin).

      Conclusion
      In patients with previously untreated NSCLC harbouring common EGFR mutations afatinib remains efficacious regardless of the presence or absence of BM. Control of synchronous asymptomatic BM with afatinib compares favourably with existing data for cranial radiation 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.

  • +

    MO12 - Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers III (ID 96)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Mini Oral Abstract Session
    • Track: Medical Oncology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      MO12.07 - The prevalence of MET expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the MetLung (OAM4971g) trial: a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study with erlotinib + onartuzumab (MetMAb) vs erlotinib + placebo in patients with previously treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (ID 2709)

      11:10 - 11:15  |  Author(s): T. Mok

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background
      MET signaling is correlated with a poor prognosis in multiple tumor types, including NSCLC. A randomized, controlled, phase II clinical trial demonstrated a PFS and OS benefit of inhibiting MET signaling with erlotinib + onartuzumab, a humanized monovalent antibody to the MET receptor, in patients whose NSCLC over-expressed MET by IHC (in press). A phase III trial (OAM4971g) is ongoing to confirm the benefit of onartuzumab when combined with erlotinib in patients with previously treated NSCLC whose tumors over-express MET by IHC (2+/3+ only). Here, we present the prevalence rates of MET expression and EGFR mutation status for patients whose tumor tissues were screened and for those enrolled in the phase III study.

      Methods
      Archival or fresh biopsy tumor specimens were submitted to a central laboratory for both MET IHC and EGFR mutation assessment. MET IHC status was determined using the CONFIRM SP44 anti-MET monoclonal antibody (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., Tucson, AZ). Patients were selected based on expression of MET by IHC, as defined by moderate or strong staining in at least 50% of tumor cells (clinical score 2+/3+). The cobas[®]EGFR mutation test was used to stratify enrollment.

      Results
      Between November 2011 and June 2013, 1605 tumor tissue samples were submitted for MET IHC and EGFR activating mutation analysis, from 188 clinical study centers. The majority of screened and enrolled patients were over 60 years of age, Caucasian, male, and had non-squamous NSCLC histology (see table). MET IHC results are available for 1474 (92%) of all submitted samples: IHC 0 (n=118, 8%), IHC 1+ (n=619, 42%), IHC 2+ (n=575, 39%), IHC 3+ (n=162, 11%). The incidence of MET IHC 2+/3+ in screened patient subgroups is as follows: non-squamous 52.5%; squamous 29.2%; non-Asian 45.9%; Asian 48%; EGFR wild type 50.3%; EGFR mutant 57.5%. Table: Patient characteristics for screened and enrolled patients in the OAM4971g study

      Screened (n=1605) Enrolled (n=443)
      Age (years)
      n 1482 442
      Median 63.0 62.5
      Range 24–89 24–84
      Race
      n 1482 443
      White 1187 (80.1%) 316 (71.3%)
      Asian 185 (12.5%) 72 (16.3%)
      Black or African American 44 (3.0%) 11 (2.5%)
      Sex
      n 1483 443
      Male 937 (63.2%) 244 (55.1%)
      Histology
      n 1451 440
      Non-squamous 1096 (75.5%) 374 (85.0%)
      MET IHC score
      n 1474 443
      3+ 162 (11.0%) 97 (21.9%)
      2+ 575 (39.0%) 346 (78.1%)
      1+ 619 (42.0%) 0 (0.0%)
      0 118 (8.0%) 0 (0.0%)
      EGFR activating mutation
      n 1422 443
      Yes 114 (8.0%) 46 (10.4%)
      No 1308 (92.0%) 397 (89.6%)

      Conclusion
      In this large population, the prevalence of MET IHC 2+/3+ was 50% in screened samples, consistent with prior IHC results for MET prevalence. The prevalence of MET IHC 2+/3+ was higher in non-squamous vs squamous tissue samples, but equally distributed across ethnicity and EGFR mutation status. The ongoing OAM4971g study will prospectively confirm whether blocking MET signaling in patients with MET IHC 2+/3+ over-expressing NSCLC provides clinically meaningful benefit in all enrolled patients and in important clinical subpopulations.

      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.

  • +

    P1.21 - Poster Session 1 - Diagnosis and Staging (ID 169)

    • Event: WCLC 2013
    • Type: Poster Session
    • Track: Prevention & Epidemiology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P1.21-002 - A survey of EGFR mutation frequency and testing practices in Asia Pacific (ID 1213)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): T. Mok

      • Abstract

      Background
      The efficacy of EGFR TKIs in EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients has led to a need for accurate, timely EGFR mutation testing worldwide. Although EGFR mutation testing has been adopted by many laboratories in Asia, accurate data are lacking on the proportion of NSCLC patients tested in each country, and the most commonly used testing methods. The objectives are to investigate the practice of EGFR mutation analysis in Asian Pacific countries and document the prevalence of routine testing in this population.

      Methods
      This is a retrospective database survey of records from NSCLC patients tested for EGFR mutations from 1 January 2011 to 1 January 2012 at participating sites across the Asia Pacific region. The majority of eligible hospitals/laboratories that participated had performed ≥ 100 EGFR mutation tests during that period. Accessible patient records were used to complete an online questionnaire, with data being stored in a central database. Primary objectives were to determine the number of NSCLC patients tested for EGFR mutations and the rate of EGFR mutation positivity: overall, by histological subtype, and by demography. Other variables included the number of NSCLC cases diagnosed, EGFR mutation testing methods used, and tumour sample characteristics and processing. The proportion of EGFR mutation-positive patients and 95% CI were calculated; other variables will be summarized descriptively. An interim analysis has been conducted using data collected from more than 18,000 newly diagnosed NSCLC patients at 29 sites.

      Results
      The data from surveyed sites indicates that the overall proportion of NSCLC patients tested for EGFR mutations was 31.9% (95% CI 31.2-32.6%), with an EGFR mutation positivity rate of 40.2% (95% CI 39.1-41.4%) overall, ranging from 28.7% to 53.4% (Table). Additional data on demographic and histological subgroups and current testing practices (methods, sample types, sample preparation) will be presented. [*: Wilson score confidence interval. **: Note that the sites from Vietnam (one site) and Philippines (one site) did not test ≥ 100 patients. N.D.: No data.]

      Table: Proportion of Patients Tested and EGFR Mutation Rates at Participating Sites
      Country Total number of newly diagnosed NSCLC patients Proportion of patients tested, % (95% CI*) EGFR mutation positivity, % (95% CI*)
      Total 18,050 31.9 (31.2-32.6) 40.2 (39.1-41.4)
      Japan 2,379 64.8 (62.9-66.7) 30.2 (28.0-32.6)
      China 12,086 18.3 (17.6-19.0) 38.1 (36.3-39.9)
      Taiwan 2,530 52.9 (50.9-54.8) 53.4 (50.7-56.0)
      Hong Kong 399 31.1 (26.7-35.8) 49.2 (40.6-57.9)
      Malaysia 357 98.6 (96.8-99.4) 45.7 (40.6-51.0)
      Thailand 249 57.8 (51.6-63.8) 45.1 (40.6-49.8)
      Vietnam** 50 100.0 (92.9-100.0) 36.0 (24.1-49.9)
      Philippines** N.D. Not Known 38.9 (29.5-49.2)
      Indonesia N.D. Not Known 28.7 (20.8-38.2)

      Conclusion
      The data collected in this survey indicate that, in 2011, testing practices varied widely across the region, despite the well-known high incidence of the mutation. The data provide an insight into these practices and provide a reference platform on which to compare and build on for the future of EGFR mutation testing and molecular diagnosis of NSCLC in Asia Pacific.

  • +

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

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

      P3.11-023 - Comparative safety profile of afatinib in Asian and non-Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive (EGFR M+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (ID 2141)

      09:30 - 09:30  |  Author(s): T. Mok

      • Abstract

      Background
      Afatinib is an oral, irreversible ErbB Family Blocker which showed superior efficacy to standard first-line chemotherapy in two large randomized Phase III trials in global (LUX-Lung 3) and Asian (LUX-Lung 6) EGFR M+ patients. In both trials, median progression-free survival on afatinib was 11 months by independent review. This was also reflected in median treatment duration of 11–12 months in both trials. With long-term treatment duration, the safety profile of afatinib becomes particularly relevant to patients and physicians, and needs to be well characterized. Furthermore, differences in the pattern of some adverse events (AEs; notably interstitial lung disease [ILD]) have been previously described in Asian and non-Asian patients with reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Here, we present a detailed review of afatinib’s safety profile in Asian and non-Asian patients.

      Methods
      229 (LUX-Lung 3) and 239 (LUX-Lung 6) EGFR M+ patients were treated with afatinib 40mg daily until progression or intolerable AEs. Afatinib dose could be escalated to 50mg daily or reduced to 30mg or 20mg based on predefined study criteria. Patients from both trials were grouped according to ethnicity: Asian vs. non-Asian. On-treatment AEs were summarized by preferred/grouped terms and graded using NCI-CTCAEv3.0.

      Results
      404 Asian (66% China/Taiwan; 16% Southeast Asia; 13% Japan; 5% Korea) and 64 non-Asian patients (95% Caucasian; 3% American-Indian; 2% African-American) received afatinib, with median exposure of 359 and 261 days, respectively. There was no difference in afatinib pharmacokinetic exposure in Asian vs. non-Asian patients. All patients reported at least one AE. Most common AEs were EGFR-mediated and are summarized in the table. Figure 1 Drug-related AEs leading to discontinuation were slightly higher in Asian patients, but at a rate lower than with chemotherapy (28%). Related ILD-like events occurred in four Asian patients (three Grade ≥3) and no non-Asian patients.

      Conclusion
      Most common drug-related AEs with afatinib were EGFR mediated and occurred at similar frequency in Asian and non-Asian patients. Treatment discontinuation due to EGFR-related AEs was low in both groups, indicating that afatinib has a manageable safety profile in both populations and is suitable for long-term treatment of EGFR M+ NSCLC patients.