Helong Zhang

Icotinib versus gefitinib in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ICOGEN): a randomised, double-blind phase 3 non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Icotinib, an oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, had shown antitumour activity and favourable toxicity in early-phase clinical trials. We aimed to investigate whether icotinib is non-inferior to gefitinib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority trial we enrolled patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer from 27 sites in China. Eligible patients were those aged 18-75 years who had not responded to one or more platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using minimisation methods, to receive icotinib (125 mg, three times per day) or gefitinib (250 mg, once per day) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed in the full analysis set. We analysed EGFR status if tissue samples were available. All investigators, clinicians, and participants were masked to patient distribution. The non-inferiority margin was 1·14; non-inferiority would be established if the upper limit of the 95% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) of gefitinib versus icotinib was less than this margin. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01040780, and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, number ChiCTR-TRC-09000506. FINDINGS 400 eligible patients were enrolled between Feb 26, 2009, and Nov 13, 2009; one patient was enrolled by mistake and removed from the study, 200 were assigned to icotinib and 199 to gefitinib. 395 patients were included in the full analysis set (icotinib, n=199; gefitinib, n=196). Icotinib was non-inferior to gefitinib in terms of progression-free survival (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·67-1·05; median progression-free survival 4·6 months [95% CI 3·5-6·3] vs 3·4 months [2·3-3·8]; p=0·13). The most common adverse events were rash (81 [41%] of 200 patients in the icotinib group vs 98 [49%] of 199 patients in the gefitinib group) and diarrhoea (43 [22%] vs 58 [29%]). Patients given icotinib had less drug-related adverse events than did those given gefitinib (121 [61%] vs 140 [70%]; p=0·046), especially drug-related diarrhoea (37 [19%] vs 55 [28%]; p=0·033). INTERPRETATION Icotinib could be a new treatment option for pretreated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

EGFR T790M ctDNA testing platforms and their role as companion diagnostics: Correlation with clinical outcomes to EGFR-TKIs.

Somatic mutation in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) predict clinical response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is a promising target for personalised medicine. EGFR mutations have prognostic value. Initially patients respond well to tyrosine kinase inhibitors but finally they would develop resistance and about 50% of this resistance can be attributed to the emergence of EGFR resistant mutation, T790M. This necessitates the need for genetic testing for clinical management of patients. Molecular testing has become the standard of care in patients with NSCLCs based on the recommendations of standard guidelines. Though there are several platforms for EGFR mutation detection, highly sensitive platforms for clinical applicability as companion diagnostics for ctDNA based testing are emerging. Due to the dynamic changes in the T790M mutation during tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment, real-time monitoring of these genetic alterations is mandate for planning treatment strategies. With the advent of third generation TKIs that potentially target T790M, improvement in clinical outcome is documented in patients with NSCLCs. Managing these outcomes with appropriate companion diagnostics using ctDNA in early detection of these genetic alterations will improve patient care.

A consensus on liquid biopsy from the 2016 Chinese Lung Cancer Summit expert panel

The diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer have evolved into the era of precision medicine. Liquid biopsy, a minimally invasive approach, has emerged as a promising practice in genetic profiling and monitoring of lung cancer. Translating liquid biopsy from bench to bedside has encountered various challenges, including technique selection, protocol standardisation, data analysis and cost management. Regarding these challenges, the 2016 Chinese Lung Cancer Summit expert panel organised a trilateral forum involving oncologists, clinicians, clinical researchers, and industrial expertise on the 13th Chinese Lung Cancer Summit to formally discuss these controversies. Six consensuses were reached to guide the use of liquid biopsy and perform precision medicine in both clinic and research.

Transdermal granisetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting following moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Chinese patients: a randomized, double-blind, phase III study

BACKGROUND The granisetron transdermal delivery system (GTDS) has been demonstrated effectiveness in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in previous studies. This is the first phase III study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of GTDS in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in China. METHODS A total of 313 patients were randomized into the GTDS group (one transdermal granisetron patch, 7 days) or the oral granisetron group (granisetron oral 2 mg/day, ≥2 days). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving complete control (CC) from chemotherapy initiation until 24 h after final administration (PEEP). Chi-square test and Fishers exact test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-one patients were included in the per protocol analysis. During PEEP, CC was achieved by 67 (47.52%) patients in the GTDS group and 83 (59.29%) patients in the oral granisetron group. There was no statistical significance between the groups (P=0.0559). However, the difference of the CC percentage mainly occurred on the first day of chemotherapy between the groups. The CC was 70.13% on day 1 in the GTDS group, which was significantly lower than that of 91.03% in the oral granisetron group in the full analysis set. In the following days of chemotherapy, the CC was similar between the groups. In terms of cisplatin-contained regimen and female, there was statistical significance between the groups. Both treatments were well tolerated and safe. The most common adverse event was constipation. CONCLUSIONS GTDS provided effective and well-tolerated control of CINV in Chinese patients, especially to non-cisplatin-contained regimen.

Managing Pain in Patients With Cancer: The Chinese Good Pain Management Experience

Purpose The number of cancer cases in China has increased rapidly from 2.1 million in 2000 to 4.3 million in 2015. As a consequence, pain management as an integral part of cancer treatment became an important health care issue. In March 2011, the Good Pain Management (GPM) program was launched to standardize the treatment of cancer pain and improve the quality of life for patients with cancer. With this work, we will describe the GPM program, its implementation experience, and highlight key lessons that can improve pain management for patients with cancer. Methods We describe procedures for the selection, implementation, and assessment procedures for model cancer wards. We analyzed published results in areas of staff training and patient education, pain management in practice, analgesic drugs administration, and patient follow-up and satisfaction. Results Pain management training enabled medical staff to accurately assess the level of pain and to provide effective pain relief through timely dispensation of medication. Patients with good knowledge of treatment of pain were able to overcome their aversion to opioid drugs and cooperate with nursing staff on pain assessment to achieve effective drug dose titration. Consumption of strong opioid drugs increased significantly; however, there was no change for weaker opioids. Higher pain remission rates were achieved for patients with moderate-to-severe pain levels. Proper patient follow-up after discharge enabled improved outcomes to be maintained. Conclusion The GPM program has instituted a consistent and high standard of care for pain management at cancer wards and improved the quality of life for patients with cancer.