Summary Background The phase 3 LUME-Lung 1 study assessed the efficacy and safety of docetaxel plus nintedanib as second-line therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Patients from 211 ...centres in 27 countries with stage IIIB/IV recurrent NSCLC progressing after first-line chemotherapy, stratified by ECOG performance status, previous bevacizumab treatment, histology, and presence of brain metastases, were allocated (by computer-generated sequence through an interactive third-party system, in 1:1 ratio), to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on day 1 plus either nintedanib 200 mg orally twice daily or matching placebo on days 2–21, every 3 weeks until unacceptable adverse events or disease progression. Investigators and patients were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent central review, analysed by intention to treat after 714 events in all patients. The key secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat after 1121 events had occurred, in a prespecified stepwise order: first in patients with adenocarcinoma who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line therapy, then in all patients with adenocarcinoma, then in all patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00805194. Findings Between Dec 23, 2008, and Feb 9, 2011, 655 patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel plus nintedanib and 659 to receive docetaxel plus placebo. The primary analysis was done after a median follow-up of 7·1 months (IQR 3·8–11·0). PFS was significantly improved in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group compared with the docetaxel plus placebo group (median 3·4 months 95% CI 2·9–3·9 vs 2·7 months 2·6–2·8; hazard ratio HR 0·79 95% CI 0·68–0·92, p=0·0019). After a median follow-up of 31·7 months (IQR 27·8–36·1), overall survival was significantly improved for patients with adenocarcinoma histology who progressed within 9 months after start of first-line treatment in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group (206 patients) compared with those in the docetaxel plus placebo group (199 patients; median 10·9 months 95% CI 8·5–12·6 vs 7·9 months 6·7–9·1; HR 0·75 95% CI 0·60–0·92, p=0·0073). Similar results were noted for all patients with adenocarcinoma histology (322 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 336 in the docetaxel plus placebo group; median overall survival 12·6 months 95% CI 10·6–15·1 vs 10·3 months 95% CI 8·6–12·2; HR 0·83 95% CI 0·70–0·99, p=0·0359), but not in the total study population (median 10·1 months 95% CI 8·8–11·2 vs 9·1 months 8·4–10·4; HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·83–1·05, p=0·2720). Grade 3 or worse adverse events that were more common in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group than in the docetaxel plus placebo group were diarrhoea (43 6·6% of 652 vs 17 2·6% of 655), reversible increases in alanine aminotransferase (51 7·8% vs six 0·9%), and reversible increases in aspartate aminotransferase (22 3·4% vs three 0·5%). 35 patients in the docetaxel plus nintedanib group and 25 in the docetaxel plus placebo group died of adverse events possibly unrelated to disease progression; the most common of these events were sepsis (five with docetaxel plus nintedanib vs one with docetaxel plus placebo), pneumonia (two vs seven), respiratory failure (four vs none), and pulmonary embolism (none vs three). Interpretation Nintedanib in combination with docetaxel is an effective second-line option for patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with one line of platinum-based therapy, especially for patients with adenocarcinoma. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Summary Background Definitive chemoradiotherapy is a curative treatment option for oesophageal carcinoma, especially in patients unsuitable for surgery. The PRODIGE5/ACCORD17 trial aimed to assess ...the efficacy and safety of the FOLFOX treatment regimen (fluorouracil plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin) versus fluorouracil and cisplatin as part of chemoradiotherapy in patients with localised oesophageal cancer. Methods We did a multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2/3 trial of patients aged 18 years or older enrolled from 24 centres in France between Oct 15, 2004, and Aug 25, 2011. Eligible participants had confirmed stage I–IVA oesophageal carcinoma (adenocarcinoma, squamous-cell, or adenosquamous), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status 0–2, sufficient caloric intake, adequate haematological, renal, and hepatic function, and had been selected to receive definitive chemoradiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either six cycles (three concomitant to radiotherapy) of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 , leucovorin 200 mg/m2 , bolus fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 , and infusional fluorouracil 1600 mg/m2 (FOLFOX) over 46 h, or four cycles (two concomitant to radiotherapy) of fluorouracil 1000 mg/m2 per day for 4 days and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1. Both groups also received 50 Gy radiotherapy in 25 fractions (five fractions per week). Random allocation to treatment groups was done by a central computerised randomisation procedure by minimisation, stratified by centre, histology, weight loss, and ECOG status, and was achieved independently from the study investigators. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Data analysis was primarily done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00861094. Findings 134 participants were randomly allocated to the FOLFOX group and 133 to the fluorouracil and cisplatin group (intention-to-treat population), and 131 patients in the FOLFOX group and 128 in the fluorouracil and cisplatin group actually received the study drugs (safety population). Median follow-up was 25·3 months (IQR 15·9–36·4). Median progression-free survival was 9·7 months (95% CI 8·1–14·5) in the FOLFOX group and 9·4 months (8·1–10·6) in the fluorouracil and cisplatin group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·70–1·24; p=0·64). One toxic death occurred in the FOLFOX group and six in the fluorouracil–cisplatin group (p=0·066). No significant differences were recorded in the rates of most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events between the treatment groups. Of all-grade adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of patients, paraesthesia (61 47% events in 131 patients in the FOLFOX group vs three 2% in 128 patients in the cisplatin–fluorouracil group, p<0·0001), sensory neuropathy (24 18% vs one 1%, p<0·0001), increases in aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (14 11% vs two 2%, p=0·002), and increases in alanine aminotransferase concentrations (11 8% vs two 2%, p=0·012) were more common in the FOLFOX group, whereas serum creatinine increases (four 3% vs 15 12%, p=0·007), mucositis (35 27% vs 41 32%, p=0·011), and alopecia (two 2% vs 12 9%, p=0·005) were more common in the fluorouracil and cisplatin group. Interpretation Although chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX did not increase progression-free survival compared with chemoradiotherapy with fluorouracil and cisplatin, FOLFOX might be a more convenient option for patients with localised oesophageal cancer unsuitable for surgery. Funding UNICANCER, French Health Ministry, Sanofi-Aventis, and National League Against Cancer.
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.
