Erlotinib as maintenance treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

Cappuzzo, Federico; Ciuleanu, Tudor-Eliade; Stelmakh, L.; Cicėnas, Saulius; Szczęsna, Aleksandra; Juhász, Erzsébet; Esteban, Emilio; Molinier, Olivier; Brugger, Wolfram; Melezínek, I.; Klingelschmitt, Gaëlle; Klughammer, Barbara; Giaccone, Giuseppe

doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70112-1

Cited by 1,065 publications

(850 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

797

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some notable differences between the PARAMOUNT and JMDB populations were the NSCLC stage percentages (stage IIIB NSCLC: 9% versus 21%, respectively), "Other or indeterminate histology" (approximately 6% versus 17%, respectively), and smoking status "Unknown" (1% versus 35%, respectively). In general, the distribution of patient and disease characteristics represented in these three groups is similar to that seen in other recent phase III studies [7], [12], [13] and [14]. Percentages not totaling 100% are due to rounding or missing data.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

Efficacy and safety of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer following pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction treatment: A cross-trial comparison of two phase III trials

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights•Compared advanced NSCLC phase III trials: pemetrexed-cisplatin with or without pem maintenance.•4 cycles pem-cis followed by pem maintenance improves survival over 6 cycles pem-cis.•Longer exposure to pem-cis or maintenance pem increases some toxicities, but overall incidence low. Abstract ObjectivesTwo phase III trials of advanced NSCLC patients were compared to examine relative efficacy and safety of differing treatment regimens. The JMDB trial investigated first-line pemetrexed-cisplatin (pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 every 21 days; maximum: 6 cycles). The PARAMOUNT phase III trial compared maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo after patients with nonsquamous NSCLC completed 4 cycles of first-line pemetrexed-cisplatin without disease progression. MethodsOverall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox methods, and toxicity rates were compared between the PARAMOUNT arms and a selected homogeneous population from JMDB: 346 patients with disease and prior treatment characteristics matching the PARAMOUNT population. ResultsOutcomes for the PARAMOUNT placebo arm were similar to the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 5.6 versus 6.2 months, p = 0.117, HR = 1.16; median OS: 14.0 versus 14.2 months, p = 0.979, HR = 1.00). The PARAMOUNT maintenance pemetrexed group had statistically superior efficacy compared with the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 7.5 versus 6.2 months, p < 0.00001, HR = 0.66; median OS: 16.9 versus 14.2 months, p = 0.003, HR = 0.75). Patients who received pemetrexed maintenance (median 4 cycles, range 1-44) following 4 cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin exhibited a higher incidence of drug-related serious adverse events compared with JMDB patients (median 6 cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin) (10.6% versus 2.9%); grade 3/4 fatigue and renal toxicity were also higher in the pemetrexed arm of PARAMOUNT. ConclusionsThe across-trial comparison of a relevant JMDB study population with the two arms of the PARAMOUNT study supported the efficacy of the pemetrexed continuation maintenance strategy and suggested the results are not influenced by limiting the pemetrexed-cisplatin induction treatment to four cycles. Although longer exposure to pemetrexed-cisplatin or maintenance pemetrexed increased some toxicities, the overall incidence remained low, underscoring the relative safety of these treatment regimens.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

Efficacy and safety of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer following pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction treatment: A cross-trial comparison of two phase III trials

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5,28,29,[37][38][39] Recent studies have provided more compelling evidence of the clinical benefits of anti-EGFR treatment in the appropriate setting. 13,15,22,38,[40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] Evidence from the large phase III randomized Iressa Pan-Asia Study trial and other phase III trials have prompted the American Society of Clinical Oncology to issue a provisional clinical opinion recommending the testing of EGFR mutational status in patients being considered for first line EGFR TKI therapy owing to their demonstrated benefit on progression-free survival. 22,41 Of note, they caution that no definitive benefit has been shown in patients treated with first-line TKIs in regards to overall survival.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular pathology of lung cancer: key to personalized medicine

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of lung adenocarcinoma patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-(EGFR) mutated or EML4-ALK rearrangement-positive tumors are sensitive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Both primary and acquired resistance in a significant number of those patients to these therapies remains a major clinical problem. The specific molecular mechanisms associated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance are not fully understood. Clinicopathological observations suggest that molecular alterations involving so-called 'driver mutations' could be used as markers that aid in the selection of patients most likely to benefit from targeted therapies. In this review, we summarize recent developments involving the specific molecular mechanisms and markers that have been associated with primary and acquired resistance to EGFR-targeted therapy in lung adenocarcinomas. Understanding these mechanisms may provide new treatment avenues and improve current treatment algorithms.

show abstract

“…In the BR.21 study, erlotinib led to a significantly better response rate, median PFS and OS than placebo in the entire previously treated, unselected NSCLC patient population [10]. In the SATURN study, erlotinib maintenance therapy for non-progressive disease after first-line platinum treatment resulted in significantly longer median PFS for the whole study population, and also for the EGFR mutant subgroup [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of erlotinib treatment in advanced KRAS mutation-negative lung adenocarcinoma patients: Results of a multicenter observational cohort study (MOTIVATE)

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjectives: Erlotinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI), used for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. As the clinical significance of KRAS mutational status has not yet been clearly determined in this setting, our aim was to investigate the efficacy of erlotinib in advanced KRAS mutation-negative lung adenocarcinoma patients. Materials and methods:MOTIVATE is an open-label, multicenter, observational trial with Tarceva ® (erlotinib) monotherapy. Enrolled patients with advanced (stage IIIB/IV) KRAS wild type (WT) lung adenocarcinoma refractory to one or two courses of prior chemotherapy were treated with erlotinib at 150 mg/day. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and best tumor response rate (RR). Results and conclusion: In total, 327 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 3.3 and 14.4 months, respectively. Three patients (1.2%) had complete response, 51 patients (20.2%) had partial response and 123 patients (48.8%) had SD.Significantly longer median PFS and OS were observed in Eastern Oncology Cooperative Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 0-1 patients, as compared to ECOG PS 2-3 patients. The longest median OS (20.5 months) was found in patients with ECOG PS 0-1 who received erlotinib as a second-line therapy. There was no difference in median OS in cohorts stratified to disease stage and smoking status. Female patients had both longer median PFS and OS. Disease control rate was 70.2%.Our results suggest that erlotinib represents a valid treatment option for patients with KRAS WT lung adenocarcinoma and, moreover, that KRAS mutation analysis could help to identify clinically relevant subgroups of NSCLC patients that may benefit from EGFR-TKI therapy.

show abstract

Erlotinib as maintenance treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

Cited by 1,065 publications

References 26 publications

Efficacy and safety of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer following pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction treatment: A cross-trial comparison of two phase III trials

Efficacy and safety of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer following pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction treatment: A cross-trial comparison of two phase III trials

Molecular pathology of lung cancer: key to personalized medicine

Effectiveness of erlotinib treatment in advanced KRAS mutation-negative lung adenocarcinoma patients: Results of a multicenter observational cohort study (MOTIVATE)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About