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 Findings from the phase 3 First-Line ErbituX in lung cancer (FLEX) study showed that the addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival ...compared with chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio HR 0·871, 95% CI 0·762–0·996; p=0·044) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To define patients benefiting most from cetuximab, we studied the association of tumour EGFR expression level with clinical outcome in FLEX study patients. Methods We used prospectively collected tumour EGFR expression data to generate an immunohistochemistry score for FLEX study patients on a continuous scale of 0–300. We used response data to select an outcome-based discriminatory threshold immunohistochemistry score for EGFR expression of 200. Treatment outcome was analysed in patients with low (immunohistochemistry score <200) and high (≥200) tumour EGFR expression. The primary endpoint in the FLEX study was overall survival. We analysed patients from the FLEX intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The FLEX study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00148798. Findings Tumour EGFR immunohistochemistry data were available for 1121 of 1125 (99·6%) patients from the FLEX study ITT population. High EGFR expression was scored for 345 (31%) evaluable patients and low for 776 (69%) patients. For patients in the high EGFR expression group, overall survival was longer in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group than in the chemotherapy alone group (median 12·0 months 95% CI 10·2–15·2 vs 9·6 months 7·6–10·6; HR 0·73, 0·58–0·93; p=0·011), with no meaningful increase in side-effects. We recorded no corresponding survival benefit for patients in the low EGFR expression group (median 9·8 months 8·9–12·2 vs 10·3 months 9·2–11·5; HR 0·99, 0·84–1·16; p=0·88). A treatment interaction test assessing the difference in the HRs for overall survival between the EGFR expression groups suggested a predictive value for EGFR expression (p=0·044). Interpretation High EGFR expression is a tumour biomarker that can predict survival benefit from the addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. Assessment of EGFR expression could offer a personalised treatment approach in this setting. Funding Merck KGaA.
Summary Background Effective maintenance therapies after chemoradiotherapy for lung cancer are lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether the MUC1 antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide ...improves survival in patients with stage III unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer when given as maintenance therapy after chemoradiation. Methods The phase 3 START trial was an international, randomised, double-blind trial that recruited patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer who had completed chemoradiotherapy within the 4–12 week window before randomisation and received confirmation of stable disease or objective response. Patients were stratified by stage (IIIA vs IIIB), response to chemoradiotherapy (stable disease vs objective response), delivery of chemoradiotherapy (concurrent vs sequential), and region using block randomisation, and were randomly assigned (2:1, double-blind) by a central interactive voice randomisation system to either tecemotide or placebo. Injections of tecemotide (806 μg lipopeptide) or placebo were given every week for 8 weeks, and then every 6 weeks until disease progression or withdrawal. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 (before tecemotide) or saline (before placebo) was given once before the first study drug administration. The primary endpoint was overall survival in a modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00409188. Findings From Feb 22, 2007, to Nov 15, 2011, 1513 patients were randomly assigned (1006 to tecemotide and 507 to placebo). 274 patients were excluded from the primary analysis population as a result of a clinical hold, resulting in analysis of 829 patients in the tecemotide group and 410 in the placebo group in the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was 25·6 months (95% CI 22·5–29·2) with tecemotide versus 22·3 months (19·6–25·5) with placebo (adjusted HR 0·88, 0·75–1·03; p=0·123). In the patients who received previous concurrent chemoradiotherapy, median overall survival for the 538 (65%) of 829 patients assigned to tecemotide was 30·8 months (95% CI 25·6–36·8) compared with 20·6 months (17·4–23·9) for the 268 (65%) of 410 patients assigned to placebo (adjusted HR 0·78, 0·64–0·95; p=0·016). In patients who received previous sequential chemoradiotherapy, overall survival did not differ between the 291 (35%) patients in the tecemotide group and the 142 (35%) patients in the placebo group (19·4 months 95% CI 17·6–23·1 vs 24·6 months 18·8–33·0, respectively; adjusted HR 1·12, 0·87–1·44; p=0·38). Grade 3–4 adverse events seen with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were dyspnoea (49 5% of 1024 patients in the tecemotide group vs 21 4% of 477 patients in the placebo group), metastases to central nervous system (29 3% vs 6 1%), and pneumonia (23 2% vs 12 3%). Serious adverse events with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were pneumonia (30 3% in the tecemotide group vs 14 3% in the placebo group), dyspnoea (29 3% vs 13 3%), and metastases to central nervous system (32 3% vs 9 2%). Serious immune-related adverse events did not differ between groups. Interpretation We found no significant difference in overall survival with the administration of tecemotide after chemoradiotherapy compared with placebo for all patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. However, tecemotide might have a role for patients who initially receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and further study in this population is warranted. Funding Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany).
Summary Background Several studies have shown the efficacy, tolerability, and ease of administration of pemetrexed—an antifolate antineoplastic agent—in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung ...cancer. We assessed pemetrexed as maintenance therapy in patients with this disease. Methods This randomised double-blind study was undertaken in 83 centres in 20 countries. 663 patients with stage IIIB or IV disease who had not progressed on four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 , day 1) plus best supportive care (n=441) or placebo plus best supportive care (n=222) in 21-day cycles until disease progression. Treatment was randomised with the Simon and Pocock minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment. All patients received vitamin B12 , folic acid, and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival and the secondary endpoint of overall survival were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00102804. Findings All randomly assigned participants were analysed. Pemetrexed significantly improved progression-free survival (4·3 months 95% CI 4·1–4·7 vs 2·6 months 1·7–2·8; hazard ratio HR 0·50, 95% CI 0·42–0·61, p<0·0001) and overall survival (13·4 months 11·9–15·9 vs 10·6 months 8·7–12·0; HR 0·79, 0·65–0·95, p=0·012) compared with placebo. Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related toxic effects were higher in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (21 5% vs three 1%). Drug-related grade three or higher toxic effects were higher with pemetrexed than with placebo (70 16% vs nine 4%; p<0·0001), specifically fatigue (22 5% vs one 1%, p=0·001) and neutropenia (13 3% vs 0, p=0·006). No pemetrexed-related deaths occurred. Relatively fewer patients in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group received systemic post-discontinuation therapy (227 51% vs 149 67%; p=0·0001). Interpretation Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is well tolerated and offers improved progression-free and overall survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Funding Eli Lilly.
Summary Background Pemetrexed maintenance therapy significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo, and had a good safety profile in a phase 3 ...placebo-controlled study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results for quality of life, symptom palliation, and tolerability are presented here. Methods After four cycles of platinum-based induction therapy, 663 patients with stage IIIB or stage IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) from March 15, 2005, to July 20, 2007, using the Pocock and Simon minimisation method to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 every 21 days; n=441) or placebo (n=222) plus best supportive care until disease progression. The primary efficacy data have been reported previously. Patients completed the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) at baseline, after each cycle, and post-discontinuation. Worsening of symptoms was defined as an increase of 15 mm or more from baseline on a 100 mm scale for each LCSS item. The primary outcome for these quality-of-life analyses was time to worsening of symptoms, analysed for all randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00102804. Findings Baseline characteristics, including LCSS scores, were well balanced between groups. Baseline LCSS scores were low, indicating low symptom burden for patients without disease progression after completion of first-line treatment. Longer time to worsening was recorded for pain (hazard ratio HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·59–0·99; p=0·041) and haemoptysis (HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·34–0·97; p=0·038) with pemetrexed than with placebo; no other significant differences in analyses of time to worsening were noted. Additional longitudinal analyses showed a greater increase in loss of appetite in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (4·3 mm vs 0·2 mm; p=0·028). Rates of resource use were statistically higher for pemetrexed than for placebo: admissions to hospital for drug-related adverse events (19 4% vs none; p=0·001), transfusions (42 10% vs seven 3%; p=0·003), and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (26 6% vs four 2%; p=0·017). Interpretation Quality of life during maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is similar to placebo, except for a small increase in loss of appetite, and significantly delayed worsening of pain and haemoptysis. In view of the improvements in overall and progression-free survival noted with pemetrexed maintenance therapy, such treatment is an option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who have not progressed after platinum-based induction therapy. Funding Eli Lilly.
PDF
