151
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy of Osimertinib Plus Bevacizumab vs Osimertinib in Patients With EGFR T790M–Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor–Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor : West Japan Oncology Group 8715L Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial assesses the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab vs osimertinib alone in patients with EGFR T790M–mutated lung adenocarcinoma.

          Key Points

          Question

          Can osimertinib plus bevacizumab work synergistically and be tolerable in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that harbors EGFR T790M mutation?

          Findings

          In this phase 2 randomized clinical trial of 81 patients with NSCLC with EGFR T790M mutation, osimertinib plus bevacizumab failed to show prolongation of progression-free survival and overall survival compared with osimertinib alone, although toxic effects were tolerable.

          Meaning

          In patients with NSCLC with EGFR T790M mutation, osimertinib plus bevacizumab was tolerable but not efficacious , which had been suggested by recent single-arm studies.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Although treatment with first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus antiangiogenic inhibitor has shown promising efficacies in patients with EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma, recent single-arm studies have suggested that osimertinib plus antiangiogenic inhibitor might not work synergistically.

          Objective

          To explore the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab compared with osimertinib alone in patients with lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR T790M mutation.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          Patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma that progressed with prior EGFR-TKI treatment (other than third-generation TKI) and acquired EGFR T790M mutation were enrolled. This study comprises a lead-in part with 6 patients and a subsequent phase 2 part. In phase 2, patients were randomized to osimertinib plus bevacizumab or osimertinib alone in a 1:1 ratio.

          Interventions

          The combination arm received oral osimertinib (80 mg, every day) plus intravenous bevacizumab (15 mg/kg, every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The control arm received osimertinib monotherapy.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by investigators. Secondary end points consisted of overall response rate, time to treatment failure, overall survival, and safety.

          Results

          From August 2017 through September 2018, a total of 87 patients were registered (6 in the lead-in part and 81 in the phase 2 part [intention-to-treat population]). Among those randomized, the median (range) age was 68 (41-82) years; 33 (41%) were male; 37 (46%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0; and 21 (26%) had brain metastasis. Although the overall response rate was better with osimertinib plus bevacizumab than osimertinib alone (68% vs 54%), median PFS was not longer with osimertinib plus bevacizumab (9.4 months vs 13.5 months; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.44; 80% CI, 1.00 to 2.08; P = .20). Median time to treatment failure was also shorter in the combination arm vs the osimertinib arm (8.4 months vs 11.2 months; P = .12). Median overall survival was not different in the combination arm vs osimertinib arm (not reached vs 22.1 months; P = .96). In the combination arm, common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were proteinuria (n = 9; 23%), hypertension (n = 8; 20%).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this randomized clinical trial comparing osimertinib plus bevacizumab vs osimertinib alone, the combination arm failed to show prolongation of PFS in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR T790M mutation.

          Trial Registration

          UMIN Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: UMIN000023761

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Osimertinib in Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

          Osimertinib is an oral, third-generation, irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that selectively inhibits both EGFR-TKI-sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations. We compared osimertinib with standard EGFR-TKIs in patients with previously untreated, EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Osimertinib or Platinum–Pemetrexed in EGFR T790M–Positive Lung Cancer

            Background Osimertinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. The efficacy of osimertinib as compared with platinum-based therapy plus pemetrexed in such patients is unknown. Methods In this randomized, international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned 419 patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, who had disease progression after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy, in a 2:1 ratio to receive either oral osimertinib (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) or intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus either carboplatin (target area under the curve, 5 [AUC5]) or cisplatin (75 mg per square meter) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles; maintenance pemetrexed was allowed. In all the patients, disease had progressed during receipt of first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Results The median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (10.1 months vs. 4.4 months; hazard ratio; 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.41; P<0.001). The objective response rate was significantly better with osimertinib (71%; 95% CI, 65 to 76) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (31%; 95% CI, 24 to 40) (odds ratio for objective response, 5.39; 95% CI, 3.47 to 8.48; P<0.001). Among 144 patients with metastases to the central nervous system (CNS), the median duration of progression-free survival was longer among patients receiving osimertinib than among those receiving platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (8.5 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.49). The proportion of patients with adverse events of grade 3 or higher was lower with osimertinib (23%) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (47%). Conclusions Osimertinib had significantly greater efficacy than platinum therapy plus pemetrexed in patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (including those with CNS metastases) in whom disease had progressed during first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; AURA3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02151981 .).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations.

              The LUX-Lung 3 study investigated the efficacy of chemotherapy compared with afatinib, a selective, orally bioavailable ErbB family blocker that irreversibly blocks signaling from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), and ErbB4 and has wide-spectrum preclinical activity against EGFR mutations. A phase II study of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma demonstrated high response rates and progression-free survival (PFS). In this phase III study, eligible patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were screened for EGFR mutations. Mutation-positive patients were stratified by mutation type (exon 19 deletion, L858R, or other) and race (Asian or non-Asian) before two-to-one random assignment to 40 mg afatinib per day or up to six cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed chemotherapy at standard doses every 21 days. The primary end point was PFS by independent review. Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). A total of 1,269 patients were screened, and 345 were randomly assigned to treatment. Median PFS was 11.1 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P = .001). Median PFS among those with exon 19 deletions and L858R EGFR mutations (n = 308) was 13.6 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65; P = .001). The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, rash/acne, and stomatitis for afatinib and nausea, fatigue, and decreased appetite for chemotherapy. PROs favored afatinib, with better control of cough, dyspnea, and pain. Afatinib is associated with prolongation of PFS when compared with standard doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR mutations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Oncol
                JAMA Oncol
                JAMA Oncology
                American Medical Association
                2374-2437
                2374-2445
                7 January 2021
                March 2021
                7 January 2021
                : 7
                : 3
                : 386-394
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Internal Medicine III, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan
                [2 ]Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Sendai Kousei Hospital, Miyagi, Japan
                [3 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, Osaka, Japan
                [4 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
                [5 ]Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Hyogo, Japan
                [6 ]Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, St Marianna University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
                [7 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Kanagawa, Japan
                [8 ]Department of Thoracic Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Aichi, Japan
                [9 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Chemotherapy Center and Division of Clinical Research, Takarazuka City Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
                [10 ]Division of Respirology, Neurology, and Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Fukuoka, Japan
                [11 ]Department of Thoracic Oncology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan
                [12 ]Department of Thoracic Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
                [13 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Itami City Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
                [14 ]Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: October 1, 2020.
                Published Online: January 7, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6758
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License. © 2021 Akamatsu H et al. JAMA Oncology.
                Corresponding Author: Hiroaki Akamatsu, MD, PhD, Internal Medicine III, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1, Kimiidera, Wakayama, Japan ( hiroakiakamatsu@ 123456gmail.com ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Akamatsu (principal investigator) had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Akamatsu, Furuya, Nishino, Morita, Nakagawa, Yamamoto.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Akamatsu, Hayashi, Fujimoto, Furuya, Otani, Shimizu, Nishino, Hara, Morita, Yamamoto.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Akamatsu, Toi, Tachihara, Furuya, Shimizu, Katakami, Azuma, Miura, Nishino, Teraoka, Nakagawa, Yamamoto.
                Statistical analysis: Akamatsu, Katakami, Morita.
                Obtained funding: Akamatsu.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Akamatsu, Hayashi, Fujimoto, Tachihara, Furuya, Otani, Shimizu, Hara, Yamamoto.
                Supervision: Nakagawa, Yamamoto.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Akamatsu reported receiving grants and personal fees from Chugai Pharmaceutical and MSD KK and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK, Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly Japan KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Toi reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, and Ono Pharmaceutical during the conduct of the study. Dr Hayashi reported receiving grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK and Chugai Pharmaceutical during the conduct of the study; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Japan, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Bristol Myers Squibb and personal fees from Eli Lilly Japan KK, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Merck Biopharma, MSD KK, Novartis Pharmaceuticals KK, Pfizer Japan Inc, Shanghai HaiHe Biopharma, and Taiho Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Fujimoto reported receiving grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan KK, MSD KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Tachihara reported receiving grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Japan Inc, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan KK, MSD KK, and Olympus outside the submitted work. Dr Furuya reported receiving personal fees from Eli Lilly Japan, Chugai, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim Japan, Taiho, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Pfizer Japan outside the submitted work. Dr Shimizu reported receiving honoraria from AstraZeneca KK, MSD KK, Ono Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Chugai Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Katakami reported receiving grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan KK, MSD KK, and Ono Pharmaceutical, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Japan, Novartis Pharma KK, and Taiho Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Azuma reported receiving personal fees from Chugai Pharma, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Ono Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Nishino reported receiving personal fees from Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Eli Lilly Japan KK, Roche Diagnostics KK, Chugai Pharma, and Ono Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Teraoka reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca and Chugai Pharmabody Research outside the submitted work. Dr Morita reported receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca KK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eli Lilly Japan KK, MSD KK, Pfizer Japan, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Ono Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Dr Nakagawa reported receiving grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca KK, Astellas Pharma, MSD KK, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis Pharma KK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Serono/Merck Biopharma and grants, personal fees, and other from Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Japan, and Eli Lilly Japan KK, during the conduct of the study; grants from inVentiv Health Japan, ICON Japan KK, Gritstone Oncology, Parexel International, Kissei Pharmaceutical, EPS Corporation, Syneos Health, Pfizer R&D Japan GK, A2 Healthcare, Quintiles/IQVIA Services JAPAN KK, EP-CRSU, Linical, Eisai, CMIC Shift Zero KK, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Bayer Yakuhin, EPS International, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical; grants and personal fees from Takeda Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and SymBio Pharmaceuticals; personal fees from Clinical Trial Co, Medicus Shuppan Publishers, Care Net, Reno Medical KK, Medical Review, Roche Diagnostics KK, Bayer Yakuhin, Medical Mobile Communications, 3H Clinical Trial, Nichi-Iko Pharmaceutical, Nanzando, Yodosha, Nikkei Business Publications, Thermo Fisher Scientific KK, Yomiuri Telecasting Corporation, and Nippon Kayaku; personal fees and other from Kyorin Pharmaceutical; and grants and personal fees from AbbVie outside the submitted work. Dr Yamamoto reported receiving grants from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study; grants from Astellas, Shionogi, Tumura, AbbVie GK, Amgen, Kyorin, Eisai, Terumo, Toppan Printing, and Tosoh; grants and personal fees from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho, Takeda, Chugai, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Life Technologies Japan, Nippon Kayaku, and Merck Biopharma, outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This work was supported by AstraZeneca Japan.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: AstraZeneca Japan was involved with review of the manuscript and its approval but was not involved with design and conduct of the study (collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data and decision to submit the manuscript for publication).
                Meeting Presentation: This study was presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Virtual Congress 2020; September 19-21, 2020.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Additional Contributions: We are grateful to data managers and other support staff of the West Japan Oncology Group, especially Koji Takeda, MD, and Shinichiro Nakamura, MD, PhD. The present study was conducted with support from the West Japan Oncology Group Data Center, Osaka, Japan. We acknowledge proofreading and editing by Benjamin Phillis, BA, at the Clinical Study Support Center, Wakayama Medical University. These individuals did not receive compensation for their contributions.
                Article
                coi200101
                10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6758
                7791398
                33410885
                3e09551d-7310-4f3d-bfc6-2ed9e247c679
                Copyright 2021 Akamatsu H et al. JAMA Oncology.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License.

                History
                : 20 June 2020
                : 1 October 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: AstraZeneca Japan
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online First
                Comments

                Comments

                Comment on this article