Summary Background Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, ...reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02008227. Findings Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months 95% CI 11·8–15·7 vs 9·6 months 8·6–11·2; hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·62–0·87, p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months 95% CI 12·6–18·0 with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months 8·8–12·0 with docetaxel; HR 0·74 95% CI 0·58–0·93; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 95% CI 0·59–0·96). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 95% CI 0·54–0·98; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 0·60–0·89; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 15% of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 43% of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. Interpretation To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. Funding F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.
Summary Background Necitumumab is a second-generation, recombinant, human immunoglobulin G1 EGFR antibody. In this study, we aimed to compare treatment with necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin ...versus gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with previously untreated stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods We did this open-label, randomised phase 3 study at 184 investigative sites in 26 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 and adequate organ function and who had not received previous chemotherapy for their disease were eligible for inclusion. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned centrally 1:1 to a maximum of six 3-week cycles of gemcitabine and cisplastin chemotherapy with or without necitumumab according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) by a telephone-based interactive voice response system or interactive web response system. Chemotherapy was gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 30 min on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 120 min on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. Necitumumab 800 mg, administered intravenously over a minimum of 50 min on days 1 and 8, was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or intolerable toxic side-effects occurred. Randomisation was stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. Neither physicians nor patients were masked to group assignment because of the expected occurrence of acne-like rash—a class effect of EGFR antibodies—that would have unmasked most patients and investigators to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. We report the final clinical analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00981058. Findings Between Jan 7, 2010, and Feb 22, 2012, we enrolled 1093 patients and randomly assigned them to receive necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=545) or gemcitabine and cisplatin (n=548). Overall survival was significantly longer in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin alone group (median 11·5 months 95% CI 10·4–12·6) vs 9·9 months 8·9–11·1; stratified hazard ratio 0·84 95% CI 0·74–0·96; p=0·01). In the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group, the number of patients with at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event was higher (388 72% of 538 patients) than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group (333 62% of 541), as was the incidence of serious adverse events (257 48% of 538 patients vs 203 38% of 541). More patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group had grade 3–4 hypomagnesaemia (47 9% of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group vs six 1% of 541 in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group) and grade 3 rash (20 4% vs one <1%). Including events related to disease progression, adverse events with an outcome of death were reported for 66 (12%) of 538 patients in the necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin group and 57 (11%) of 541 patients in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group; these were deemed to be related to study drugs in 15 (3%) and ten (2%) patients, respectively. Overall, we found that the safety profile of necitumumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin was acceptable and in line with expectations. Interpretation Our findings show that the addition of necitumumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy improves overall survival in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer and represents a new first-line treatment option for this disease. Funding Eli Lilly and Company.
NSCLC transformation to SCLC has been best characterized with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, with emerging case reports seen in ALK, RET, and KRAS-altered NSCLC. Previous reports revealed transformed SCLC from ...EGFR-mutant NSCLC portends very poor prognosis and lack effective treatment. Genomic analyses revealed TP53 and RB1 loss of function increase the risk of SCLC transformation. Little has been reported on the detailed clinicogenomic characteristics and potential therapeutic targets for this patient population.
In this study, we conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of clinical and genomic characteristics of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC transformed to SCLC. Demographic data, treatment course, and clinical molecular testing reports were extracted from electronic medical records. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate survival outcomes. Next generation sequencing-based assays was used to identify EGFR and co-occurring genetic alterations in tissue or plasma before and after SCLC transformation. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) was performed on a patient-derived-xenograft model generated from a patient with EGFR-NSCLC transformed SCLC tumor.
A total of 34 patients were identified in our study. Median age at initial diagnosis was 58, and median time to SCLC transformation was 24.2 months. 68% were female and 82% were never smokers. 79% of patients were diagnosed as stage IV disease, and over half had brain metastases at baseline. Median overall survival of the entire cohort was 38.3 months from initial diagnoses and 12.4 months from time of SCLC transformation. Most patients harbored EGFR exon19 deletions as opposed to exon21 L858R alteration. Continuing EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor post-transformation did not improve overall survival compared with those patients where tyrosine kinase inhibitor was stopped in our cohort. In the 20 paired pretransformed and post-transformed patient samples, statistically significant enrichment was seen with PIK3CA alterations (p = 0.04) post-transformation. Profiling of longitudinal liquid biopsy samples suggest emergence of SCLC genetic alterations before biopsy-proven SCLC, as shown by increasing variant allele frequency of TP53, RB1, PIK3CA alterations. ScRNA-seq revealed potential therapeutic targets including DLL3, CD276 (B7-H3) and PTK7 were widely expressed in transformed SCLC.
SCLC transformation is a potential treatment resistance mechanism in driver-mutant NSCLC. In our cohort of 34 EGFR-mutant NSCLC, poor prognosis was observed after SCLC transformation. Clinicogenomic analyses of paired and longitudinal samples identified genomic alterations emerging post-transformation and scRNA-seq reveal potential therapeutic targets in this population. Further studies are needed to rigorously validate biomarkers and therapeutic targets for this patient population.
Insulin-like growth factor signaling has been implicated in acquired resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in NSCLC. This phase 1 trial (NCT02191891) investigated the combination of ...xentuzumab (an insulin-like growth factor-ligand neutralizing monoclonal antibody) and afatinib (an EGFR TKI) in patients with previously treated EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.
The trial comprised dose escalation (part A) and expansion (part B). Patients had advanced or metastatic NSCLC that had progressed on EGFR TKI monotherapy or platinum-based chemotherapy (nonadenocarcinoma only, part A) or irreversible EGFR TKI monotherapy (part B). Absence of EGFR T790M mutation was required in part B. Part A used a 3 + 3 design, with a starting dose of xentuzumab 1000 mg/wk (intravenous) and afatinib 30 mg/d (oral). Primary endpoints were the maximum tolerated dose of the combination (part A) and objective response (part B).
A total of 16 patients each were treated in parts A and B. Maximum tolerated dose was xentuzumab 1000 mg/wk plus afatinib 40 mg/d. No patients in part B had an objective response, but 10 had stable disease (median range duration of disease control: 2.3 0.8–10.9 mo). The most common drug-related adverse events were diarrhea (75 %), paronychia (69 %), and rash (69 %) in part A and diarrhea (31 %), rash (19 %), paronychia (19 %), and fatigue (19 %) in part B.
There were no new safety issues; xentuzumab and afatinib could be safely coadministered. Nevertheless, the combination revealed only modest activity in patients with EGFR mutation-positive, T790M-negative NSCLC after progression on afatinib.
Abstract Background: Incadronate has been found to lessen the increase in corrected serum calcium levels in malignancy-associated hypercalcemia (MAH) in a Phase III study in Japan. The drug is ...currently used to treat MAH in Japan. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical usefulness of incadronate in patients with MAH. Methods: This open-label study was conducted at 3 medical institutions in Korea. Korean patients with MAH (corrected serum calcium levels ≥11.0 mg/dL) were given a single 10-mg IV infusion of incadronate over 2 to 4 hours in 500 to 1000 mL of normal saline. Corrected calcium levels were determined and subjective symptoms and objective findings (ie, bone pain, spontaneous pain, pain from contusion, tenderness, other pain, loss of appetite, nausea and/or vomiting, thirst, constipation, fatigue, and disturbance of consciousness) were used to monitor the effectiveness of the drug for 6 days after the infusion. Symptoms were evaluated using a 4-point scale (0 = none to 3 = severe). Adverse events (AEs) were identified by patients' reports, and adverse drug events (ADEs) were assessed by the investigators throughout the study. Results: Twenty-four Korean patients (18 75%male, 6 25%female; mean age, 56.5 years) were included in the study; data from 22 and 24 patients were used to assess effectiveness and tolerability, respectively. Corrected serum calcium level was significantly decreased on day 6 after treatment compared with pretreatment on day 0 (baseline) (9.51 0.89 mg/dL vs 11.83 0.89 mg/dL; P < 0.001). The antihypercalcemic effect of incadronate became apparent as an inhibition of bone absorption a few days after infusion. Corrected serum calcium level was significantly decreased on days 2 to 6 ( P < 0.001) after treatment compared with pretreatment at baseline. Evaluation of symptoms showed significant improvement in the incadronate-treated group (mean total score range at baseline, 8 1–23 and day 6, 5.5 1–17; P = 0.001). Eight (33.3%) of the patients were found to have ADEs. Some of the 8 patients experienced >1 ADE (mild and transient fever 13 events, chills 3, headache 1, and myalgia 1). AEs were observed in 19 (79.2%) of 24 patients. The most frequently reported AE was fever (14 events). Conclusion: In this small, open-label study, Korean subjects with MAH treated with incadronate experienced significant improvement in symptoms and calcium levels from baseline.
Summary Background Outcomes are poor for patients with previously treated, advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab ...is clinically active against cancer, including NSCLC, especially cancers expressing PD-L1 on tumour cells, tumour-infiltrating immune cells, or both. We assessed efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus docetaxel in previously treated NSCLC, analysed by PD-L1 expression levels on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells and in the intention-to-treat population. Methods In this open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial, patients with NSCLC who progressed on post-platinum chemotherapy were recruited in 61 academic medical centres and community oncology practices across 13 countries in Europe and North America. Key inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), and adequate haematological and end-organ function. Patients were stratified by PD-L1 tumour-infiltrating immune cell status, histology, and previous lines of therapy, and randomly assigned (1:1) by permuted block randomisation (with a block size of four) using an interactive voice or web system to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. Baseline PD-L1 expression was scored by immunohistochemistry in tumour cells (as percentage of PD-L1-expressing tumour cells TC3≥50%, TC2≥5% and <50%, TC1≥1% and <5%, and TC0<1%) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (as percentage of tumour area: IC3≥10%, IC2≥5% and <10%, IC1≥1% and <5%, and IC0<1%). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population and PD-L1 subgroups at 173 deaths. Biomarkers were assessed in an exploratory analysis. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01903993. Findings Patients were enrolled between Aug 5, 2013, and March 31, 2014. 144 patients were randomly allocated to the atezolizumab group, and 143 to the docetaxel group. 142 patients received at least one dose of atezolizumab and 135 received docetaxel. Overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 12·6 months (95% CI 9·7–16·4) for atezolizumab versus 9·7 months (8·6–12·0) for docetaxel (hazard ratio HR 0·73 95% CI 0·53–0·99; p=0·04). Increasing improvement in overall survival was associated with increasing PD-L1 expression (TC3 or IC3 HR 0·49 0·22–1·07; p=0·068, TC2/3 or IC2/3 HR 0·54 0·33–0·89; p=0·014, TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 HR 0·59 0·40–0·85; p=0·005, TC0 and IC0 HR 1·04 0·62–1·75; p=0·871). In our exploratory analysis, patients with pre-existing immunity, defined by high T-effector–interferon-γ-associated gene expression, had improved overall survival with atezolizumab. 11 (8%) patients in the atezolizumab group discontinued because of adverse events versus 30 (22%) patients in the docetaxel group. 16 (11%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus 52 (39%) patients in the docetaxel group had treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events, and one (<1%) patient in the atezolizumab group versus three (2%) patients in the docetaxel group died from a treatment-related adverse event. Interpretation Atezolizumab significantly improved survival compared with docetaxel in patients with previously treated NSCLC. Improvement correlated with PD-L1 immunohistochemistry expression on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells, suggesting that PD-L1 expression is predictive for atezolizumab benefit. Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile distinct from chemotherapy. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech Inc.
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.
Summary Background Ramucirumab is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus ...ramucirumab or placebo as second-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy. Methods In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (REVEL), we enrolled patients with squamous or non-squamous NSCLC who had progressed during or after a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) with a centralised, interactive voice-response system (stratified by sex, region, performance status, and previous maintenance therapy yes vs no) to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and either ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo on day 1 of a 21 day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all patients allocated to treatment. We assessed adverse events according to treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01168973. Findings Between Dec 3, 2010, and Jan 24, 2013, we screened 1825 patients, of whom 1253 patients were randomly allocated to treatment. Median overall survival was 10·5 months (IQR 5·1–21·2) for 628 patients allocated ramucirumab plus docetaxel and 9·1 months (4·2–18·0) for 625 patients who received placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·75–0·98; p=0·023). Median progression-free survival was 4·5 months (IQR 2·3–8·3) for the ramucirumab group compared with 3·0 months (1·4–6·9) for the control group (0·76, 0·68–0·86; p<0·0001). We noted treatment-emergent adverse events in 613 (98%) of 627 patients in the ramucirumab safety population and 594 (95%) of 618 patients in the control safety population. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (306 patients 49% in the ramucirumab group vs 246 40% in the control group), febrile neutropenia (100 16% vs 62 10%), fatigue (88 14% vs 65 10%), leucopenia (86 14% vs 77 12%), and hypertension (35 6% vs 13 2%). The numbers of deaths from adverse events (31 5% vs 35 6%) and grade 3 or worse pulmonary haemorrhage (eight 1% vs eight 1%) did not differ between groups. Toxicities were manageable with appropriate dose reductions and supportive care. Interpretation Ramucirumab plus docetaxel improves survival as second-line treatment of patients with stage IV NSCLC. Funding Eli Lilly.
Summary Background Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. However, the optimum number of treatment cycles remains ...controversial. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data to compare the efficacy of six versus fewer planned cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods All randomised trials comparing six versus fewer planned cycles of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, proportion of patients with an objective response, and toxicity. Statistical analyses were by intention-to-treat, stratified by trial. Overall survival and progression-free survival were compared by log-rank test. The proportion of patients with an objective response was compared with a Mantel-Haenszel test. Prespecified analyses explored effect variations by trial and patient characteristics. Findings Five eligible trials were identified; individual patient data could be collected from four of these trials, which included 1139 patients—568 of whom were assigned to six cycles, and 571 to three cycles (two trials) or four cycles (two trials). Patients received cisplatin (two trials) or carboplatin (two trials). No evidence indicated a benefit of six cycles of chemotherapy on overall survival (median 9·54 months 95% CI 8·98–10·69 in patients assigned to six cycles vs 8·68 months 8·03–9·54 in those assigned to fewer cycles; hazard ratio HR 0·94 95% CI 0·83–1·07, p=0·33) with slight heterogeneity between trials (p=0·076; I2 =56%). We recorded no evidence of a treatment interaction with histology, sex, performance status, or age. Median progression-free survival was 6·09 months (95% CI 5·82–6·87) in patients assigned to six cycles and 5·33 months (4·90–5·62) in those assigned to fewer cycles (HR 0·79, 95% CI 0·68–0·90; p=0·0007), and 173 (41·3%) of 419 patients assigned to six cycles and 152 (36·5%) of 416 patients assigned to three or four cycles had an objective response (p=0·16), without heterogeneity between the four trials. Anaemia at grade 3 or higher was slightly more frequent with a longer duration of treatment: 12 (2·9%) of 416 patients assigned to three-to-four cycles and 32 (7·8%) of 411 patients assigned to six cycles had severe anaemia. Interpretation Six cycles of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not improve overall survival compared with three or four courses in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Our findings suggest that fewer than six planned cycles of chemotherapy is a valid treatment option for these patients. Funding None.
Summary Background Afatinib, an irreversible ErbB-family blocker, has shown preclinical activity when tested in EGFR mutant models with mutations that confer resistance to EGFR tyrosine-kinase ...inhibitors. We aimed to assess its efficacy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma with previous treatment failure on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Methods In this phase 2b/3 trial, we enrolled patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance (ECOG) performance score of 0–2 who had received one or two previous chemotherapy regimens and had disease progression after at least 12 weeks of treatment with erlotinib or gefitinib. We used a computer-generated sequence to randomly allocate patients (2:1) to either afatinib (50 mg per day) or placebo; all patients received best supportive care. Randomisation was done in blocks of three and was stratified by sex and baseline ECOG performance status (0–1 vs 2). Investigators, patients, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival (from date of randomisation to death), analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00656136. Findings Between May 26, 2008, and Sept 21, 2009, we identified 697 patients, 585 of whom were randomly allocated to treatment (390 to afatinib, 195 to placebo). Median overall survival was 10·8 months (95% CI 10·0–12·0) in the afatinib group and 12·0 months (10·2–14·3) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·08, 95% CI 0·86–1·35; p=0·74). Median progression-free survival was longer in the afatinib group (3·3 months, 95% CI 2·79–4·40) than it was in the placebo group (1·1 months, 0·95–1·68; hazard ratio 0·38, 95% CI 0·31–0·48; p<0·0001). No complete responses to treatment were noted; 29 (7%) patients had a partial response in the afatinib group, as did one patient in the placebo group. Subsequent cancer treatment was given to 257 (68%) patients in the afatinib group and 153 (79%) patients in the placebo group. The most common adverse events in the afatinib group were diarrhoea (339 87% of 390 patients; 66 17% were grade 3) and rash or acne (305 78% patients; 56 14% were grade 3). These events occurred less often in the placebo group (18 9% of 195 patients had diarrhoea; 31 16% had rash or acne), all being grade 1 or 2. Drug-related serious adverse events occurred in 39 (10%) patients in the afatinib group and one (<1%) patient in the placebo group. We recorded two possibly treatment-related deaths in the afatinib group. Interpretation Although we recorded no benefit in terms of overall survival with afatinib (which might have been affected by cancer treatments given after progression in both groups), our findings for progression-free survival and response to treatment suggest that afatinib could be of some benefit to patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma who have failed at least 12 weeks of previous EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor treatment. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim Inc.
PDF
