Virtual Library
Start Your Search
E. Ehrnrooth
Author of
-
+
OA23 - EGFR Targeted Therapies in Advanced NSCLC (ID 410)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Oral Session
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:O.T. Brustugun, S. Lu
- Coordinates: 12/07/2016, 14:20 - 15:50, Stolz 2
-
+
OA23.03 - Second-Line Afatinib for Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung: Analysis of Afatinib Long-Term Responders in the Phase III LUX-Lung 8 Trial (ID 4711)
14:40 - 14:50 | Author(s): E. Ehrnrooth
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung is a genetically complex and difficult-to-treat cancer. In LUX-Lung 8, afatinib (40mg/day) significantly improved OS (median 7.9 vs 6.8 months, HR=0.81 [95% CI, 0.69‒0.95], p=0.008), PFS (2.6 vs 1.9 months, HR=0.81 [0.69‒0.96], p=0.010) and DCR versus erlotinib (150mg/day) in patients with relapsed/refractory SCC of the lung (n=795). Notably, 12-month (36 vs 28%; p=0.016) and 18-month survival (22 vs 14%; p=0.016) was significantly higher with afatinib than erlotinib, indicating that some patients derive prolonged benefit from afatinib. Here, we present post-hoc analysis of baseline characteristics and efficacy/safety of afatinib in long-term responders (treatment for ≥12 months). Hypothesis-generating analysis of archived tumor samples and blood serum was undertaken to identify possible molecular/clinical biomarkers.
Methods:
Tumor samples were retrospectively analyzed using FoundationOne[TM] next-generation sequencing (NGS); EGFR expression was determined by immunohistochemistry. Pre-treatment serum samples were analyzed with VeriStrat[®], a MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry test, and classified as VeriStrat-Good or VeriStrat-Poor-risk.
Results:
15/398 patients treated with afatinib were long-term responders. Median duration of treatment was 16.6 months (range: 12.3‒25.8). Patient characteristics were similar to the overall dataset (median age: 65 years [range: 54‒81]; male: 80.0%; Asian: 13.3%; ECOG 0/1: 40.0%/60.0%; best response to chemotherapy CR or PR/SD: 53.3%/46.7%; current and ex-smokers: 80.0%). Median PFS was 16.2 months (range: 2.8‒24.0); median OS was 23.1 months (range: 12.9‒31.5). The most common treatment-related AEs (all grade/grade 3) were: diarrhea (73.3%/6.7%); rash/acne (66.7%/6.7%); stomatitis (13%/7%). AEs generally occurred soon after treatment onset (median onset, days [range]: diarrhea 11 [5‒48]; rash/acne 17 [9‒107]; stomatitis 15 [11‒19]). Four patients required a dose reduction to 30mg/day due to treatment-related AEs (diarrhea, rash, stomatitis, diarrhea/rash). NGS was undertaken in 9 patients and details will be presented at the meeting. Genomic aberrations in the ErbB/FGF gene families were identified in 44.4%/55.6% of long-term responders (overall dataset: 29.4%/58.0%). Of 14 patients assessed by VeriStrat, 85.7% were VeriStrat-Good (overall dataset: 61.6%). Immunohistochemistry data was available for two patients; one overexpressed EGFR (≥10% positive cells; H-score ≥200)
Conclusion:
Baseline characteristics of long-term responders to afatinib were similar to the overall dataset. In this sub-group, afatinib conferred a survival benefit of nearly 2 years. Afatinib was well tolerated with predictable and transient AEs that occurred soon after treatment onset. The dataset was too small to identify any clear NGS/VeriStrat predictive signals. Further studies are required to predict long-term response to afatinib.
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.
-
+
P3.02b - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 494)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Advanced NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- 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): E. Ehrnrooth
- 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.
