Virtual Library
Start Your Search
K.H. Lee
Author of
-
+
P2.03a - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 464)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/06/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P2.03a-038 - Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed/Carboplatin vs Pemetrexed Only in Chemo-Naïve Elderly Non-SQCC NSCLC Patients Aged ≥ 70 (ID 5036)
14:30 - 14:30 | Author(s): K.H. Lee
- Abstract
Background:
We aimed to compare pemetrexed/carboplatin doublet (PC) versus pemetrexed singlet (P) as induction therapy in chemotherapy-naïve elderly patients aged 70 or more with advanced non-squamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 or 1.
Methods:
In this open-label multicenter phase III randomized trial, elderly patients aged 70 or more with advanced non-squamous NSCLC, ECOG PS of 0-1, no prior chemotherapy, adequate organ function and measurable disease were assigned to PC doublet (P, 500 mg/m2; C, area under the curve of 5) or P singlet (500 mg/m2) after stratified randomization according to center, gender and Charson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The treatment was given every 3 weeks till disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. However, carboplatin was given for only the first four cycles during induction therapy period. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival, response rate, and safety.
Results:
A total of 267 eligible patients were enrolled from six centers between March 2012 and October 2015; median age was 74 years (70~86); 95% had PS of 1; 68% were men; and 61% had CCI of 1 or more. The median PFS was 5.4 months for PC doublet and 4.2 months for P singlet, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.11; P= 0.2353). The median survival time was 12.5 months for PC and 9.0 months for P, respectively (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.21; P =0.4108). The objective response rates for PC doublet and P singlet were 34.7% and 25.9%, respectively (p=0.1387). The most common adverse events in PC doublet arm were anemia (9.6%), fatigue (8%) and pneumonia (6.4%) while those in P singlet arm were pneumonia (4.2%), fatique (3.3%) and anemia (2.5%) in descending of frequency.
Conclusion:
The addition of carboplatin to pemetrexed during induction therapy period did not show the improvement of survival time in elderly patients aged 70 or more with advanced non-squamous NSCLC and ECOG PS of 0-1 even though it increased the response rate numerically. Updated data will be presented.
-
+
P3.02b - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 494)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 2
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/07/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P3.02b-003 - Second-Line Afatinib versus Erlotinib for Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung (LUX-Lung 8): Analysis of Tumour and Serum Biomarkers (ID 5627)
14:30 - 14:30 | Author(s): K.H. Lee
- Abstract
Background:
LUX-Lung 8 compared second-line afatinib (40 mg/day; n=398) and erlotinib (150 mg/day; n=397) in patients with stage IIIB/IV squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung. PFS (median 2.6 vs 1.9 months, HR=0.81 [95% CI, 0.69–0.96], p=0.010) and OS (median 7.9 vs 6.8 months, HR=0.81 [0.69–0.95], p=0.008) were both significantly improved with afatinib versus erlotinib. Here we report exploratory molecular (n=245) and immunohistochemical (n=288) analyses of tumour samples to assess the frequency of short variants (SVs) and copy number alterations (CNAs) in cancer-related genes and whether these tumour genomic alterations, or EGFR expression levels, have clinical utility as prognostic/predictive biomarkers in patients with SCC of the lung. We also assessed the predictive utility of the prospectively validated VeriStrat®, a serum protein test (n=675).
Methods:
Archived tumour samples were retrospectively analysed using next-generation sequencing (FoundationOne™). Tumour EGFR expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry; EGFR positivity was defined as staining in ≥10% of cells. Pretreatment serum samples were assigned as VeriStrat-Good or VeriStrat-Poor according to a mass spectrometry signature. Cox regression analysis was used to correlate OS/PFS with genomic alterations (individual or grouped into gene families e.g. ErbB family), EGFR expression levels and VeriStrat status.
Results:
The frequency of ErbB family alterations was low (SVs: EGFR 6.5%, HER2 4.9%, HER3 6.1%, HER4 5.7%; CNAs: EGFR 6.9%, HER2 3.7%). No individual genetic alterations, or grouped ErbB family aberrations, were prognostic of OS/PFS. Treatment benefit from afatinib versus erlotinib was consistent in all molecular subgroups. Most tumours were EGFR-positive by immunohistochemistry (afatinib: 82%; erlotinib: 86%). EGFR expression was not predictive of OS or PFS benefit (EGFR-positive PFS: HR=0.76 [0.57‒1.02]; OS: HR=0.84 [0.63‒1.12]; EGFR-negative PFS: HR=0.87 [0.45‒1.68]; OS: HR=0.77 [0.40‒1.51]). In afatinib-treated patients, both PFS (HR=0.56 [0.43‒0.72], p<0.0001) and OS (HR=0.40 [0.31‒0.51], p<0.0001) were improved in the VeriStrat-Good versus the VeriStrat-Poor group. VeriStrat-Good patients had significantly longer OS and PFS when treated with afatinib versus erlotinib (median OS: 11.5 vs 8.9 months, HR=0.79 [0.63‒0.98]; PFS: HR=0.73 [0.59‒0.92]). In VeriStrat-Poor patients there was no significant difference in OS between afatinib and erlotinib (HR=0.90 [0.70‒1.16]). However, there was no significant interaction between treatment arms and VeriStrat classification.
Conclusion:
Despite comprehensive, multifaceted analysis, no biomarkers were identified that predicted the benefit with afatinib over erlotinib in patients with SCC of the lung. Afatinib is a treatment option in this setting irrespective of patients’ tumour genetics or EGFR expression levels. However, patient outcome strongly depends on VeriStrat status.
-
+
P3.02b-053 - A Randomized, Open Label, Phase II Study Comparing Pemetrexed plus Cisplatin versus Pemetrexed Alone in EGFR Mutant NSCLC after EGFR-TKI: QOL Data (ID 5401)
14:30 - 14:30 | Author(s): K.H. Lee
- Abstract
Background:
Various therapeutic strategies are available for NSCLC patients who develop disease progression on first-line EGFR-TKI. Platinum doublet is usually recommended, however, it has not been established which cytotoxic regimens are preferable for these patients. We conducted a prospective randomized phase II trial to compare the clinical outcomes between pemetrexed plus ciplatin combination therapy with pemetrexed monotherapy after failure of first-line EGFR-TKI.
Methods:
Patients with non-squamous NSCLC harboring activating EGFR mutation who have progressed on first-line EGFR-TKI were randomly assigned in a ratio of 1:1 to pemetrexed plus cisplatin or pemetrexed alone. Patients were treated with pemetrexed 500 mg/m[2] and cisplatin 70 mg/m[2] for four cycles, followed by maintenance pemetrexed as single agent every 3 weeks or treated with pemetrexed 500 mg/m[2] monotherapy every 3 weeks until progression. Primary objective wasPFS, and secondary objectives include overall response rate (ORR), OS, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), safety and toxicity profile. The HRQOL was assessed every 2 cycles by using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13.
Results:
96 patients were randomized and 91 patients were treated at 14 centers in Korea. The characteristics of pemetrexed plus cisplatin (PC) arm (N=48) and pemetrexed alone (P) arm (N=48) were well balanced; the median age was 60 vs. 64 years old; 37 vs. 33 patients were females; 39 vs. 43 patients were ECOG PS 1. The ORR of PC arm (N=46) was 34.8% (16/46), while P arm (N=45) was 17.8% (8/45). With 20.4 (range 4.1-33.4) months of follow-up, the median PFS was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5-6.3) in PC arm and 6.4 months (95% CI, 3.6-9.2) in P arm (p=.313). One-year survival rate was 77% for PC arm, 68% for P arm, respectively. The most common adverse events include anorexia (N=34, 37.4%), nausea (N=24, 26.4%), neuropathy (N=10, 11.0%) and skin change (N=10, 11.0%). Adverse events ≥ Grade 3 were in 12 patients (26.1%) in PC arm and 8 patients (17.8%) in P arm. Dose reduction (5 vs. 2 patients) and dose delay (10 vs. 4 patients) were required more often in PC arm. With 385 pairs of questionnaire of EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLO-LC13 obtained from 94 patients, overall, the time trends of HRQOL were not significantly different between two arms. Further analysis of survival data will be updated.
Conclusion:
Pemetrexed plus cisplatin combination therapy showed higher response rate than pemetrexed monotherapy without significant difference in PFS. There was no significant difference in quality of life between two arms.
