Naoyuki Nogami

CH5424802 (RO5424802) for patients with ALK-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-001JP study): a single-arm, open-label, phase 1–2 study

BACKGROUND Currently, crizotinib is the only drug that has been approved for treatment of ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to study the activity and safety of CH5424802, a potent, selective, and orally available ALK inhibitor. METHODS In this multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase 1-2 study of CH5424802, we recruited ALK inhibitor-naive patients with ALK-rearranged advanced NSCLC from 13 hospitals in Japan. In the phase 1 portion of the study, patients received CH5424802 orally twice daily by dose escalation. The primary endpoints of the phase 1 were dose limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetic parameters. In the phase 2 portion of the study, patients received CH5424802 at the recommended dose identified in the phase 1 portion of the study orally twice a day. The primary endpoint of the phase 2 was the proportion of patients who had an objective response. Treatment was continued in 21-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable adverse events, or withdrawal of consent. The analysis was done by intent to treat. This study is registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center, number JapicCTI-101264. FINDINGS Patients were enrolled between Sept 10, 2010, and April 18, 2012. The data cutoff date was July 31, 2012. In the phase 1 portion, 24 patients were treated at doses of 20-300 mg twice daily. No DLTs or adverse events of grade 4 were noted up to the highest dose; thus 300 mg twice daily was the recommended phase 2 dose. In the phase 2 portion of the study, 46 patients were treated with the recommended dose, of whom 43 achieved an objective response (93.5%, 95% CI 82.1-98.6) including two complete responses (4.3%, 0.5-14.8) and 41 partial responses (89.1%, 76.4-96.4). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 were recorded in 12 (26%) of 46 patients, including two patients each experiencing decreased neutrophil count and increased blood creatine phosphokinase. Serious adverse events occurred in five patients (11%). No grade 4 adverse events or deaths were reported. The study is still ongoing, since 40 of the 46 patients in the phase 2 portion remain on treatment. INTERPRETATION CH5424802 is well tolerated and highly active in patients with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. FUNDING Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd.

Phase III Trial Comparing Docetaxel and Cisplatin Combination Chemotherapy With Mitomycin, Vindesine, and Cisplatin Combination Chemotherapy With Concurrent Thoracic Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: OLCSG 0007

PURPOSE To demonstrate the efficacy of docetaxel and cisplatin (DP) chemotherapy with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) for patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients age 75 years or younger with LA-NSCLC, stratified by performance status, stage, and institution, were randomly assigned to two arms consisting of DP (docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 29, and 36) or mitomycin, vindesine, and cisplatin (MVP) chemotherapy with concurrent TRT. RESULTS Between July 2000 and July 2005, 200 patients were allocated into either the DP or MVP arm. The survival time at 2 years, a primary end point, was favorable to the DP arm (P = .059 by a stratified log-rank test as a planned analysis and P = .044 by an early-period, weighted log-rank as an unplanned analysis). There was a trend toward improved response rate, 2-year survival rate, median progression-free time, and median survival in the DP arm (78.8%, 60.3%,13.4 months, and 26.8 months, respectively) compared with the MVP arm (70.3%, 48.1%, 10.5 months, and 23.7 months, respectively), which was not statistically significant (P > .05). Grade 3 febrile neutropenia occurred more often in the MVP arm than in the DP arm (39% v 22%, respectively; P = .012), and grade 3 to 4 radiation esophagitis was likely to be more common in the DP arm than in the MVP arm (14% v 6%, P = .056). CONCLUSION DP chemotherapy combined with concurrent TRT is an alternative to MVP chemotherapy for patients with LA-NSCLC.

Osimertinib in Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Background Osimertinib is an oral, third‐generation, irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR‐TKI) that selectively inhibits both EGFR‐TKI–sensitizing and EGFR T790M resistance mutations. We compared osimertinib with standard EGFR‐TKIs in patients with previously untreated, EGFR mutation–positive advanced non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods In this double‐blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 556 patients with previously untreated, EGFR mutation–positive (exon 19 deletion or L858R) advanced NSCLC in a 1:1 ratio to receive either osimertinib (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) or a standard EGFR‐TKI (gefitinib at a dose of 250 mg once daily or erlotinib at a dose of 150 mg once daily). The primary end point was investigator‐assessed progression‐free survival. Results The median progression‐free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with standard EGFR‐TKIs (18.9 months vs. 10.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.57; P<0.001). The objective response rate was similar in the two groups: 80% with osimertinib and 76% with standard EGFR‐TKIs (odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.90; P=0.24). The median duration of response was 17.2 months (95% CI, 13.8 to 22.0) with osimertinib versus 8.5 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 9.8) with standard EGFR‐TKIs. Data on overall survival were immature at the interim analysis (25% maturity). The survival rate at 18 months was 83% (95% CI, 78 to 87) with osimertinib and 71% (95% CI, 65 to 76) with standard EGFR‐TKIs (hazard ratio for death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.88; P=0.007 [nonsignificant in the interim analysis]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were less frequent with osimertinib than with standard EGFR‐TKIs (34% vs. 45%). Conclusions Osimertinib showed efficacy superior to that of standard EGFR‐TKIs in the first‐line treatment of EGFR mutation–positive advanced NSCLC, with a similar safety profile and lower rates of serious adverse events. (Funded by AstraZeneca; FLAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02296125.)

Vandetanib in patients with previously treated RET-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LURET): an open-label, multicentre phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND RET rearrangements are rare oncogenic alterations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Vandetanib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor exhibiting RET kinase activity. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of vandetanib in patients with advanced RET-rearranged NSCLC. METHODS In this open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial (LURET), patients with advanced RET-rearranged NSCLC continuously received 300 mg of oral vandetanib daily. RET-positive patients were screened using a nationwide genomic screening network of about 200 participating institutions. Primary endpoint was the independently assessed objective response in eligible patients. This study is registered with UMIN-CTR, number UMIN000010095. FINDINGS Between Feb 7, 2013, and March 19, 2015, 1536 patients with EGFR mutation-negative NSCLC were screened, of whom 34 were RET-positive (2%) and 19 were enrolled. Among 17 eligible patients included in primary analysis, nine (53% [95% CI 28-77]) achieved an objective response, which met the primary endpoint. In the intention-to-treat population of all 19 patients treated with vandetanib, nine (47% [95% CI 24-71]) achieved an objective response. At the data cutoff, median progression-free survival was 4·7 months (95% CI 2·8-8·5). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (11 [58%]), diarrhoea (two [11%]), rash (three [16%]), dry skin (one [5%]), and QT prolongation (two [11%]). INTERPRETATION Vandetanib showed clinical antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced RET-rearranged NSCLC. Our results define RET rearrangement as a new molecular subgroup of NSCLC suitable for targeted therapy. FUNDING The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the Practical Research for Innovation Cancer Control from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, AMED.

Osimertinib As First-Line Treatment of EGFR Mutation–Positive Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose The AURA study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01802632) included two cohorts of treatment-naïve patients to examine clinical activity and safety of osimertinib (an epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] -tyrosine kinase inhibitor selective for EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor sensitizing [ EGFRm] and EGFR T790M resistance mutations) as first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Sixty treatment-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC received osimertinib 80 or 160 mg once daily (30 patients per cohort). End points included investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety evaluation. Plasma samples were collected at or after patients experienced disease progression, as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), to investigate osimertinib resistance mechanisms. Results At data cutoff (November 1, 2016), median follow-up was 19.1 months. Overall ORR was 67% (95% CI, 47% to 83%) in the 80-mg group, 87% (95% CI, 69% to 96%) in the 160-mg group, and 77% (95% CI, 64% to 87%) across doses. Median PFS time was 22.1 months (95% CI, 13.7 to 30.2 months) in the 80-mg group, 19.3 months (95% CI, 13.7 to 26.0 months) in the 160-mg group, and 20.5 months (95% CI, 15.0 to 26.1 months) across doses. Of 38 patients with postprogression plasma samples, 50% had no detectable circulating tumor DNA. Nine of 19 patients had putative resistance mechanisms, including amplification of MET (n = 1); amplification of EGFR and KRAS (n = 1); MEK1, KRAS, or PIK3CA mutation (n = 1 each); EGFR C797S mutation (n = 2); JAK2 mutation (n = 1); and HER2 exon 20 insertion (n = 1). Acquired EGFR T790M was not detected. Conclusion Osimertinib demonstrated a robust ORR and prolonged PFS in treatment-naïve patients with EGFRm advanced NSCLC. There was no evidence of acquired EGFR T790M mutation in postprogression plasma samples.

Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC

BACKGROUND The cancer‐cell–killing property of atezolizumab may be enhanced by the blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor–mediated immunosuppression with bevacizumab. This open‐label, phase 3 study evaluated atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received chemotherapy. METHODS We randomly assigned patients to receive atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP), bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP), or atezolizumab plus BCP (ABCP) every 3 weeks for four or six cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab, bevacizumab, or both. The two primary end points were investigator‐assessed progression‐free survival both among patients in the intention‐to‐treat population who had a wild‐type genotype (WT population; patients with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were excluded) and among patients in the WT population who had high expression of an effector T‐cell (Teff) gene signature in the tumor (Teff‐high WT population) and overall survival in the WT population. The ABCP group was compared with the BCP group before the ACP group was compared with the BCP group. RESULTS In the WT population, 356 patients were assigned to the ABCP group, and 336 to the BCP group. The median progression‐free survival was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (8.3 months vs. 6.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.74; P<0.001); the corresponding values in the Teff‐high WT population were 11.3 months and 6.8 months (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.68]; P<0.001). Progression‐free survival was also longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group in the entire intention‐to‐treat population (including those with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations) and among patients with low or negative programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) expression, those with low Teff gene‐signature expression, and those with liver metastases. Median overall survival among the patients in the WT population was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (19.2 months vs. 14.7 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P=0.02). The safety profile of ABCP was consistent with previously reported safety risks of the individual medicines. CONCLUSIONS The addition of atezolizumab to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression‐free survival and overall survival among patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD‐L1 expression and EGFR or ALK genetic alteration status. (Funded by F. Hoffmann–La Roche/Genentech; IMpower150 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02366143.)

Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Gefitinib With Erlotinib in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma: WJOG 5108L

PURPOSE The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase has been an important target for non-small-cell lung cancer. Several EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are currently approved, and both gefitinib and erlotinib are the most well-known first-generation EGFR-TKIs. This randomized phase III study was conducted to investigate the difference between these two EGFR-TKIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously treated patients with lung adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive gefitinib or erlotinib. This study aimed to investigate the noninferiority of gefitinib compared with erlotinib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Five hundred sixty-one patients were randomly assigned, including 401 patients (71.7%) with EGFR mutation. All baseline factors (except performance status) were balanced between the arms. Median PFS and overall survival times for gefitinib and erlotinib were 6.5 and 7.5 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.125; 95% CI, 0.940 to 1.347; P = .257) and 22.8 and 24.5 months (HR, 1.038; 95% CI, 0.833 to 1.294; P = .768), respectively. The response rates for gefitinib and erlotinib were 45.9% and 44.1%, respectively. Median PFS times in EGFR mutation-positive patients receiving gefitinib versus erlotinib were 8.3 and 10.0 months, respectively (HR, 1.093; 95% CI, 0.879 to 1.358; P = .424). The primary grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rash (2.2% for gefitinib v 18.1% for erlotinib) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation (6.1%/13.0% for gefitinib v 2.2%/3.3% for erlotinib). CONCLUSION The study did not demonstrate noninferiority of gefitinib compared with erlotinib in terms of PFS in patients with lung adenocarcinoma according to the predefined criteria.

Phase II Trial of Gefitinib in Combination with Bevacizumab as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer with Activating EGFR Gene Mutations: The Okayama Lung Cancer Study Group Trial 1001

Purpose: Whether bevacizumab enhances the effect of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor gefitinib on EGFR mutant non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) remains unknown. We conducted a phase II trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of gefitinib when combined with bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR gene mutations. Methods: In this trial, 42 patients with a performance status of 0 to 2 received gefitinib (250 mg/d) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg, every 3 weeks). The primary end point of this study was the 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. We assumed that a 1-year PFS rate of 55% would indicate potential usefulness and that a 1-year PFS rate of 40% would constitute the lower limit of interest. Results: Forty-two patients were enrolled in the study with a median age of 73 (range 42–86) years. Activating EGFR gene mutations included exon 19 deletion (57%) and L858R point mutations in exon 21 (38%). The objective response rate was 73.8% and included two complete responses. The 1-year PFS rate and median PFS time were 56.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.9–70.5) and 14.4 months (95% CI 10.1–19.2), respectively. The median PFS differed significantly between EGFR exon 19 deletion and the L858R point mutation (18.0 versus 9.4 months, respectively; p = 0.006). The median overall survival had not yet been reached. Severe adverse events included grade 3 skin rash (15%), hypertension (17%), aspartate transaminase/alanine aminotransferase elevation (17%), proteinuria (7%), intracranial hemorrhage (2%), and grade 4 perforation of the digestive tract (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusion: Gefitinib in combination with bevacizumab as first-line therapy seems to be a favorable and well-tolerated treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC with activating EGFR gene mutations, especially those with EGFR exon 19 deletion mutations, although the primary end point was not met because the lower limit of the CI was less than 40%.

Evaluation of lesions corresponding to ground-glass opacities that were resected after computed tomography follow-up examination

BACKGROUND Ground-glass opacity (GGO), which is closely related with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), is being detected more frequently. BAC is considered to be a relatively less aggressive tumor, and immediate resection at the time of detection might not be necessary. Therefore, when GGO is detected, a CT follow-up examination is often performed. If growth is detected during the follow-up CT examination, resection is usually considered. However, the possible treatment delay caused by the scheduling of a CT follow-up examination is an issue that must be clarified. Since the cancer might progress during the follow-up period, such follow-up periods might have a negative influence on the patients prognosis. This study attempted to clarify whether CT follow-up causes treatment delay. METHODS A total of 113 lung cancer patients with pure or mixed GGO findings who underwent a resection after a CT follow-up examination between 1999 and 2005 were retrospectively examined. The CT findings at the initial detection, the changes in the CT findings during the CT follow-up period, the histology, the pathological stage and the outcomes after resection were reviewed and evaluated. RESULTS The CT finding at the time of the initial detection showed pure GGO in 63 patients and mixed GGO in 50 patients. Histology revealed that adenocarcinoma was found in all 113 patients; squamous cell carcinoma was not found in any of the patients. One-hundred twelve patients were diagnosed as having Stage IA, and a singe patient with visceral pleura invasion was diagnosed as having Stage IB. Complete resections were performed in all the patients. The median postoperative follow-up period was 45.0 months. No recurrences or deaths were observed during the study period. CONCLUSIONS No treatment delays or negative influences on patient outcome resulted from the CT follow-up period. A future prospective study should be conducted to establish the optimal CT follow-up program.

A single-arm confirmatory study of amrubicin therapy in patients with refractory small-cell lung cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study (JCOG0901)

OBJECTIVES We conducted an open-label, multicenter, single-arm study to confirm the efficacy and safety of amrubicin (AMR), a topoisomerase II inhibitor, for treating refractory small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with chemotherapy-refractory SCLC received 40 mg/m(2) AMR for 3 consecutive days, every 21 days. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR) and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Between November 2009 and February 2011, 82 patients were enrolled. Each patient received a median of four treatment cycles (range, 1-22 cycles). ORR was 32.9% [P<0.0001 by the exact binomial test for the null hypothesis that ORR ≤ 10%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 22.9-44.2%]. The median PFS and OS periods were 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0-4.3 months) and 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.6-11.3 months), respectively. Significant differences in ORR (21.4% v 45.0%; P=0.034), PFS (median, 2.9 v 5.1 months; P=0.0009), and OS (median, 7.9 v 13.1 months; P=0.0128) were observed between patients previously treated with etoposide and others. Neutropenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events (93.9%), and febrile neutropenia developed in 26.8% patients. No treatment-related death occurred. CONCLUSIONS AMR monotherapy can be considered an effective and safe treatment option for refractory SCLC. Previous chemotherapy with etoposide may influence AMR efficacy.