Summary Background We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, ...randomised, phase 3 trials. Methods Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin LUX-Lung 3 or gemcitabine-cisplatin LUX-Lung 6), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion del19, Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393. Findings Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35–44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31–37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28·2 months (95% CI 24·6–33·6) in the afatinib group and 28·2 months (20·7–33·2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·66–1·17, p=0·39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23·1 months (95% CI 20·4–27·3) in the afatinib group and 23·5 months (18·0–25·6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·72–1·22, p=0·61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33·3 months (95% CI 26·8–41·5) in the afatinib group versus 21·1 months (16·3–30·7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·36–0·79, p=0·0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31·4 months (95% CI 24·2–35·3) versus 18·4 months (14·6–25·6), respectively (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·44–0·94, p=0·023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27·6 months (19·8–41·7) in the afatinib group versus 40·3 months (24·3–not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1·30, 95% CI 0·80–2·11, p=0·29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19·6 months (95% CI 17·0–22·1) versus 24·3 months (19·0–27·0), respectively (HR 1·22, 95% CI 0·81–1·83, p=0·34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3–4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 16% of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 15% of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 14% and 13 5%), paronychia (26 11% in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 5% in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 18% of 111 patients), fatigue (14 13%) and leucopenia (nine 8%) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 27% of 113 patients), vomiting (22 19%), and leucopenia (17 15%). Interpretation Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Summary Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive ...non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months 95% CI 10·6–12·9 with afatinib vs 10·9 months 9·1–11·5 with gefitinib; hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·57–0·95, p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months 95% CI 11·9–15·0 with afatinib vs 11·5 months 10·1–13·1 with gefitinib; HR 0·73 95% CI 0·58–0·92, p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 13% of 160 patients given afatinib vs two 1% of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 9% patients given afatinib vs five 3% of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 9% of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR -mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Non-small-cell lung cancer is one of the leading causes of deaths from cancer worldwide. Therefore, improvements in diagnostics and treatments are urgently needed. In this review, we will discuss the ...evolution of lung cancer staging towards more non-invasive, endoscopy-based, and image-based methods, and the development of stage-adapted treatment. A special focus will be placed on the role of novel surgical approaches and modern radiotherapy strategies for early stages of disease, the effect of multimodal treatment in locally advanced disease, and ongoing developments in the treatment of patients with metastatic disease. In particular, we will include an emphasis on targeted therapies, which are based on the assumption that a treatable driver mutation or gene rearrangement is present within the tumour. Finally, the position of lung cancer treatment on the pathway to personalised therapy will be discussed.
Summary Background Ceritinib is a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, which has shown robust anti-tumour efficacy, along with intracranial activity, in patients with ALK ...-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. In phase 1 and 2 studies, ceritinib has been shown to be highly active in both ALK inhibitor-naive and ALK inhibitor-pretreated patients who had progressed after chemotherapy (mostly multiple lines). In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of ceritinib versus single-agent chemotherapy in patients with advanced ALK -rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer who had previously progressed following crizotinib and platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged at least 18 years with ALK -rearranged stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer (with at least one measurable lesion) who had received previous chemotherapy (one or two lines, including a platinum doublet) and crizotinib and had subsequent disease progression, from 99 centres across 20 countries. Other inclusion criteria were a WHO performance status of 0–2, adequate organ function and laboratory test results, a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks, and having recovered from previous anticancer treatment-related toxicities. We randomly allocated patients (1:1; with blocking block size of four; stratified by WHO performance status 0 vs 1–2 and presence or absence of brain metastases) to oral ceritinib 750 mg per day fasted (in 21 day treatment cycles) or chemotherapy (intravenous pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 investigator choice, every 21 days). Patients who discontinued chemotherapy because of progressive disease could cross over to the ceritinib group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population, assessed every 6 weeks until month 18 and every 9 weeks thereafter. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01828112 , and is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. Findings Between June 28, 2013, and Nov 2, 2015, we randomly allocated 231 patients; 115 (50%) to ceritinib and 116 (50%) to chemotherapy (40 34% to pemetrexed, 73 63% to docetaxel, and three 3% discontinued before receiving treatment). Median follow-up was 16·5 months (IQR 11·5–21·4). Ceritinib showed a significant improvement in median progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy (5·4 months 95% CI 4·1–6·9 for ceritinib vs 1·6 months 1·4–2·8 for chemotherapy; hazard ratio 0·49 0·36–0·67; p<0·0001). Serious adverse events were reported in 49 (43%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group and 36 (32%) of 113 in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related serious adverse events were similar between groups (13 11% in the ceritinib group vs 12 11% in the chemotherapy group). The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events in the ceritinib group were increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (24 21% of 115 vs two 2% of 113 in the chemotherapy group), increased γ glutamyltransferase concentration (24 21% vs one 1%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration (16 14% vs one 1% in the chemotherapy group). Six (5%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group discontinued because of adverse events compared with eight (7%) of 116 in the chemotherapy group. 15 (13%) of 115 patients in the ceritinib group and five (4%) of 113 in the chemotherapy group died during the treatment period (from the day of the first dose of study treatment to 30 days after the final dose). 13 (87%) of the 15 patients who died in the ceritinib group died because of disease progression and two (13%) died because of an adverse event (one 7% cerebrovascular accident and one 7% respiratory failure); neither of these deaths were considered by the investigator to be treatment related. The five (4%) deaths in the chemotherapy group were all due to disease progression. Interpretation These findings show that patients derive significant clinical benefit from a more potent ALK inhibitor after failure of crizotinib, and establish ceritinib as a more efficacious treatment option compared with chemotherapy in this patient population. Funding Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Summary Background Two phase II trials in patients with previously-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer suggested that gefitinib was efficacious and less toxic than was chemotherapy. We ...compared gefitinib with docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer who had been pretreated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods We undertook an open-label phase III study with recruitment between March 1, 2004, and Feb 17, 2006, at 149 centres in 24 countries. 1466 patients with pretreated (≥one platinum-based regimen) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned with dynamic balancing to receive gefitinib (250 mg per day orally; n=733) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously in 1-h infusion every 3 weeks; n=733). The primary objective was to compare overall survival between the groups with co-primary analyses to assess non-inferiority in the overall per-protocol population and superiority in patients with high epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-gene-copy number in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00076388. Findings 1433 patients were analysed per protocol (723 in gefitinib group and 710 in docetaxel group). Non-inferiority of gefitinib compared with docetaxel was confirmed for overall survival (593 vs 576 events; hazard ratio HR 1·020, 96% CI 0·905–1·150, meeting the predefined non-inferiority criterion; median survival 7·6 vs 8·0 months). Superiority of gefitinib in patients with high EGFR-gene-copy number (85 vs 89 patients) was not proven (72 vs 71 events; HR 1·09, 95% CI 0·78–1·51; p=0·62; median survival 8·4 vs 7·5 months). In the gefitinib group, the most common adverse events were rash or acne (360 49% vs 73 10%) and diarrhoea (255 35% vs 177 25%); whereas in the docetaxel group, neutropenia (35 5% vs 514 74%), asthenic disorders (182 25% vs 334 47%), and alopecia (23 3% vs 254 36%) were most common. Interpretation INTEREST established non-inferior survival of gefitinib compared with docetaxel, suggesting that gefitinib is a valid treatment for pretreated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Funding AstraZeneca.
Summary Background The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) ...in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. Methods In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15–28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00883779. Findings From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months 95% CI 7·2–8·3, vs 6·0 months 5·6–7·1, hazard ratio HR 0·57 0·47–0·69; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3–20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7–17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 0·64–0·99; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months 12·9–20·4 vs 6·9 months 5·3–7·6, HR 0·25 0·16–0·39; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months 22·2–undefined, vs 20·6 months 14·2–26·9, HR 0·48 0·27–0·84; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 29% patients and 55 25%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 14% and 31 14%, respectively), and anaemia (26 12% and 21 9%, respectively). Interpretation Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Summary Background Optimum management strategies for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors are undefined. We aimed to ...assess the efficacy and safety of continuing gefitinib combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with EGFR -mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with acquired resistance to first-line gefitinib. Methods The randomised, phase 3, multicentre IMPRESS study was done in 71 centres in 11 countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, chemotherapy-naive, stage IIIB–IV EGFR -mutation-positive advanced NSCLC with previous disease control with first-line gefitinib and recent disease progression (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by central block randomisation to oral gefitinib 250 mg or placebo once daily in tablet form; randomisation did not include stratification factors. All patients also received the platinum-based doublet chemotherapy cisplatin 75 mg/m2 plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 on the first day of each cycle. After completion of a maximum of six chemotherapy cycles, patients continued their randomly assigned treatment until disease progression or another discontinuation criterion was met. All study investigators and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study has completed enrolment, but patients are still in follow-up for overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01544179. Findings Between March 29, 2012, and Dec 20, 2013, 265 patients were randomly assigned: 133 to the gefitinib group and 132 to the placebo group. At the time of data cutoff (May 5, 2014), 98 (74%) patients had disease progression in the gefitinib group compared with 107 (81%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·65–1·13; p=0·27; median progression-free survival 5·4 months in both groups 95% CI 4·5–5·7 in the gefitinib group and 4·6–5·5 in the placebo group). The most common adverse events of any grade were nausea (85 64% of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 81 61% of 132 patients in the placebo group) and decreased appetite (65 49% and 45 34%). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were anaemia (11 8% of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and five 4% of 132 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (nine 7% and seven 5%). 37 (28%) of 132 patients in the gefitinib group and 28 (21%) of 132 patients in the placebo group reported serious adverse events. Interpretation Continuation of gefitinib after radiological disease progression on first-line gefitinib did not prolong progression-free survival in patients who received platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as subsequent line of treatment. Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy remains the standard of care in this setting. Funding AstraZeneca.
Summary Background Dacomitinib is an irreversible pan-EGFR family tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Findings from a phase 2 study in non-small cell lung cancer showed favourable efficacy for dacomitinib ...compared with erlotinib. We aimed to compare dacomitinib with erlotinib in a phase 3 study. Methods In a randomised, multicentre, double-blind phase 3 trial in 134 centres in 23 countries, we enrolled patients who had locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, progression after one or two previous regimens of chemotherapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2, and presence of measurable disease. We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to dacomitinib (45 mg/day) or erlotinib (150 mg/day) with matching placebo. Treatment allocation was masked to the investigator, patient, and study funder. Randomisation was stratified by histology (adenocarcinoma vs non-adenocarcinoma), ethnic origin (Asian vs non-Asian and Indian sub-continent), performance status (0–1 vs 2), and smoking status (never-smoker vs ever-smoker). The coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival per independent review for all randomly assigned patients, and for all randomly assigned patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. The study has completed accrual and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01360554. Findings Between June 22, 2011, and March 12, 2013, we enrolled 878 patients and randomly assigned 439 to dacomitinib (256 KRAS wild type) and 439 (263 KRAS wild type) to erlotinib. Median progression-free survival was 2·6 months (95% CI 1·9–2·8) in both the dacomitinib group and the erlotinib group (stratified hazard ratio HR 0·941, 95% CI 0·802–1·104, one-sided log-rank p=0·229). For patients with wild-type KRAS , median progression-free survival was 2·6 months for dacomitinib (95% CI 1·9–2·9) and erlotinib (95% CI 1·9–3·0; stratified HR 1·022, 95% CI 0·834–1·253, one-sided p=0·587). In patients who received at least one dose of study drug, the most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were diarrhoea (47 11% patients in the dacomitinib group vs ten 2% patients in the erlotinib group), rash (29 7% vs 12 3%), and stomatitis (15 3% vs two <1%). Serious adverse events were reported in 52 (12%) patients receiving dacomitinib and 40 (9%) patients receiving erlotinib. Interpretation Irreversible EGFR inhibition with dacomitinib was not superior to erlotinib in an unselected patient population with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer or in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Further study of irreversible EGFR inhibitors should be restricted to patients with activating EGFR mutations. Funding Pfizer.
Summary Background Patients with EGFR -mutant non-small-cell lung cancer generally have a progression-free survival of 9–13 months while being treated with the EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors ...gefitinib or erlotinib. However, resistance inevitably develops, and more effective EGFR inhibitors are needed. Dacomitinib is a covalent pan-HER inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients previously treated with gefitinib or erlotinib. We did a trial of dacomitinib as initial systemic therapy in clinically and molecularly selected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods In this open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial, we enrolled treatment-naive patients with advanced lung cancer who had clinical (never-smokers <100 cigarettes per lifetime or former light smokers <10 pack-years per lifetime and ≥15 years since last cigarette) or molecular ( EGFR mutation, regardless of smoking status) characteristics associated with response to EGFR inhibitors. We gave dacomitinib orally once daily (45 mg or 30 mg) until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. We used Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria (version 1.0) to investigate the activity of dacomitinib in all patients with a baseline scan and at least one post-treatment scan, with investigator assessment of response and progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months in the as-enrolled population, with a null hypothesis of progression-free survival at 4 months of 50% or less. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00818441 , and is no longer accruing patients. Findings Between March 11, 2009, and April 1, 2011, we enrolled 89 patients from 25 centres, including 45 (51%) with EGFR -activating mutations in exon 19 (n=25) or exon 21 (n=20). Progression-free survival at 4 months was 76·8% (95% CI 66·4–84·4) in the as-enrolled population, and was 95·5% (95% CI 83·2–98·9) in the EGFR -mutant population. The most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea in 83 (93%) patients, dermatitis acneiform in 69 (78%) patients, dry skin in 39 (44%) patients, and stomatitis in 36 (40%) patients. Two patients (2%) had grade 4 treatment-related events (one with hypokalaemia and one with dyspnoea). No grade 5 toxicities were recorded. Interpretation Dacomitinib had encouraging clinical activity as initial systemic treatment in clinically or molecularly selected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Funding Pfizer.
Summary Background Most patients with non-small-cell lung cancer tumours that have EGFR mutations have deletion mutations in exon 19 or the Leu858Arg point mutation in exon 21, or both (ie, common ...mutations). However, a subset of patients (10%) with mutations in EGFR have tumours that harbour uncommon mutations. There is a paucity of data regarding the sensitivity of these tumours to EGFR inhibitors. Here we present data for the activity of afatinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer that have tumours harbouring uncommon EGFR mutations. Methods In this post-hoc analysis, we used prospectively collected data from tyrosine kinase inhibitor-naive patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced (stage IIIb–IV) lung adenocarcinomas who were given afatinib in a single group phase 2 trial (LUX-Lung 2), and randomised phase 3 trials (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6). Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, including all randomly assigned patients with uncommon EGFR mutations. The type of EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion del19, Leu858Arg point mutation in exon 21, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only; Asian vs non-Asian) were pre-specified stratification factors in the randomised trials. We categorised all uncommon mutations as: point mutations or duplications in exons 18–21 (group 1); de-novo Thr790Met mutations in exon 20 alone or in combination with other mutations (group 2); or exon 20 insertions (group 3). We also assessed outcomes in patients with the most frequent uncommon mutations, Gly719Xaa, Leu861Gln, and Ser768Ile, alone or in combination with other mutations. Response was established by independent radiological review. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , numbers NCT00525148 , NCT00949650 , and NCT01121393. Findings Of 600 patients given afatinib across the three trials, 75 (12%) patients had uncommon EGFR mutations (38 in group 1, 14 in group 2, 23 in group 3). 27 (71·1%, 95% CI 54·1–84·6) patients in group 1 had objective responses, as did two (14·3%, 1·8–42·8) in group 2 and two (8·7%, 1·1–28·0) in group 3. Median progression-free survival was 10·7 months (95% CI 5·6–14·7) in group 1, 2·9 months (1·2–8·3) in group 2; and 2·7 months (1·8–4·2) in group 3. Median overall survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 16·4–26·9) in group 1, 14·9 months (8·1–24·9) in group 2, and 9·2 months (4·1–14·2) in group 3. For the most frequent uncommon mutations, 14 (77·8%, 95% CI 52·4–93·6) patients with Gly719Xaa had an objective response, as did nine (56·3%, 29·9–80·2) with Leu861Gln, and eight (100·0%, 63·1–100·0) with Ser768Ile. Interpretation Afatinib was active in non-small-cell lung cancer tumours that harboured certain types of uncommon EGFR mutations, especially Gly719Xaa, Leu861Gln, and Ser768Ile, but less active in other mutations types. Clinical benefit was lower in patients with de-novo Thr790Met and exon 20 insertion mutations. These data could help inform clinical decisions for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring uncommon EGFR mutations. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
PDF
