Shun Lu

Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND Activating mutations in EGFR are important markers of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The OPTIMAL study compared efficacy and tolerability of the TKI erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. METHODS We undertook an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 22 centres in China. Patients older than 18 years with histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a confirmed activating mutation of EGFR (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R point mutation) received either oral erlotinib (150 mg/day) until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects, or up to four cycles of gemcitabine plus carboplatin. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a minimisation procedure and were stratified according to EGFR mutation type, histological subtype (adenocarcinoma vs non-adenocarcinoma), and smoking status. The primary outcome was progression-free survival, analysed in patients with confirmed disease who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00874419, and has completed enrolment; patients are still in follow-up. FINDINGS 83 patients were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 82 to receive gemcitabine plus carboplatin; 82 in the erlotinib group and 72 in the chemotherapy group were included in analysis of the primary endpoint. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in erlotinib-treated patients than in those on chemotherapy (13.1 [95% CI 10.58-16.53] vs 4.6 [4.21-5.42] months; hazard ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.10-0.26; p<0.0001). Chemotherapy was associated with more grade 3 or 4 toxic effects than was erlotinib (including neutropenia in 30 [42%] of 72 patients and thrombocytopenia in 29 [40%] patients on chemotherapy vs no patients with either event on erlotinib); the most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effects with erlotinib were increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations (three [4%] of 83 patients) and skin rash (two [2%] patients). Chemotherapy was also associated with increased treatment-related serious adverse events (ten [14%] of 72 patients [decreased platelet count, n=8; decreased neutrophil count, n=1; hepatic dysfunction, n=1] vs two [2%] of 83 patients [both hepatic dysfunction]). INTERPRETATION Compared with standard chemotherapy, erlotinib conferred a significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and was associated with more favourable tolerability. These findings suggest that erlotinib is important for first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd (China); Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality.

Afatinib versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine for first-line treatment of Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring EGFR mutations (LUX-Lung 6): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Afatinib-an oral irreversible ErbB family blocker-improves progression-free survival compared with pemetrexed and cisplatin for first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared afatinib with gemcitabine and cisplatin-a chemotherapy regimen widely used in Asia-for first-line treatment of Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC. METHODS This open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was done at 36 centres in China, Thailand, and South Korea. After central testing for EGFR mutations, treatment-naive patients (stage IIIB or IV cancer [American Joint Committee on Cancer version 6], performance status 0-1) were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either oral afatinib (40 mg per day) or intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on day 1 and day 8 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 of a 3-week schedule for up to six cycles. Randomisation was done centrally with a random number-generating system and an interactive internet and voice-response system. Randomisation was stratified by EGFR mutation (Leu858Arg, exon 19 deletions, or other; block size three). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment assignment, but the independent central imaging review group were. Treatment continued until disease progression, intolerable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01121393. FINDINGS 910 patients were screened and 364 were randomly assigned (242 to afatinib, 122 to gemcitabine and cisplatin). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the afatinib group (11·0 months, 95% CI 9·7-13·7) than in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group (5·6 months, 5·1-6·7; hazard ratio 0·28, 95% CI 0·20-0·39; p<0·0001). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the afatinib group were rash or acne (35 [14·6%] of 239 patients), diarrhoea (13 [5·4%]), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5·4%]), compared with neutropenia (30 [26·5%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19·5%]), and leucopenia (17 [15·0%]) in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 15 (6·3%) patients in the afatinib group and nine (8·0%) patients in the gemcitabine and cisplatin group. INTERPRETATION First-line afatinib significantly improves progression-free survival with a tolerable and manageable safety profile in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced lung NSCLC. Afatinib should be considered as a first-line treatment option for this patient population. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Afatinib versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6): analysis of overall survival data from two randomised, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, randomised, phase 3 trials. METHODS Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 3] or gemcitabine-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 6]), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393. FINDINGS Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35-44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31-37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28.2 months (95% CI 24.6-33.6) in the afatinib group and 28.2 months (20.7-33.2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.17, p=0.39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23.1 months (95% CI 20.4-27.3) in the afatinib group and 23.5 months (18.0-25.6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72-1.22, p=0.61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33.3 months (95% CI 26.8-41.5) in the afatinib group versus 21.1 months (16.3-30.7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.79, p=0.0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31.4 months (95% CI 24.2-35.3) versus 18.4 months (14.6-25.6), respectively (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.94, p=0.023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27.6 months (19.8-41.7) in the afatinib group versus 40.3 months (24.3-not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.11, p=0.29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19.6 months (95% CI 17.0-22.1) versus 24.3 months (19.0-27.0), respectively (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.81-1.83, p=0.34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3-4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 [16%] of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 [15%] of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 [14%] and 13 [5%]), paronychia (26 [11%] in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5%] in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 [18%] of 111 patients), fatigue (14 [13%]) and leucopenia (nine [8%]) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 [27%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19%]), and leucopenia (17 [15%]). INTERPRETATION Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (INFORM; C-TONG 0804): a multicentre, double-blind randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Maintenance treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without disease progression after first-line chemotherapy is a subject of ongoing research. The aim of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, INFORM study was to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the EGFR-tyrosine-kinase inhibitor gefitinib in the maintenance setting. METHODS Patients were aged 18 years or older, were of east Asian ethnic origin, had a life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIb or IV NSCLC, a WHO performance status of 0-2, and had completed four cycles of first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy without disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Between Sept 28, 2008 and Aug 11, 2009, 296 patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either gefitinib (250 mg per day orally) or placebo (orally) within 3-6 weeks after chemotherapy until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Randomisation was done via an interactive web response system with computer-generated randomisation codes. Our primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This completed study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00770588. FINDINGS Progression-free survival was significantly longer with gefitinib (n=148) than with placebo (148) (median progression-free survival 4·8 months [95% CI 3·2-8·5] vs 2·6 months [1·6-2·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·42, 95% CI 0·33-0·55; p<0·0001). Adverse events occurred more frequently with gefitinib than with placebo; the most common adverse events of any grade were rash (73 [50%] of 147 in the gefitinib group vs 14 [9%] of 148 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (37 [25%] vs 13 [9%]), and alanine aminotransferase increase (31 [21%] vs 12 [8%]). The most commonly reported grade 3 or 4 adverse event was alanine aminotransferase increase (3 [2%] of 147 in the gefitinib group, none of 148 in the placebo group). Ten of 147 (7%) patients given gefitinib and five of 148 (3%) patients given placebo had serious adverse events. Three deaths were thought to be related to treatment with gefitinib: one from interstitial lung disease; one from lung infection; and one from pneumonia. INTERPRETATION Maintenance treatment with gefitinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients from east Asia with advanced NSCLC who achieved disease control after first-line chemotherapy. Clinicians should consider these data when making decisions about maintenance treatment in such patients. FUNDING AstraZeneca.

First-line erlotinib versus gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: analyses from the phase III, randomized, open-label, ENSURE study

BACKGROUND The phase III, randomized, open-label ENSURE study (NCT01342965) evaluated first-line erlotinib versus gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) in patients from China, Malaysia and the Philippines with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients ≥18 years old with histologically/cytologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 were randomized 1:1 to receive erlotinib (oral; 150 mg once daily until progression/unacceptable toxicity) or GP [G 1250 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1 and 8 (3-weekly cycle); P 75 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1, (3-weekly cycle) for up to four cycles]. Primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Other end points include objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS A total of 217 patients were randomized: 110 to erlotinib and 107 to GP. Investigator-assessed median PFS was 11.0 months versus 5.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-0.51; log-rank P < 0.0001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed median PFS was consistent (HR, 0.42). Median OS was 26.3 versus 25.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively (HR, 0.91, 95% CI 0.63-1.31; log-rank P = .607). ORR was 62.7% for erlotinib and 33.6% for GP. Treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2.7% versus 10.6% of erlotinib and GP patients, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were rash (6.4%) with erlotinib, and neutropenia (25.0%), leukopenia (14.4%), and anemia (12.5%) with GP. CONCLUSION These analyses demonstrate that first-line erlotinib provides a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus GP in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC (NCT01342965).

Afatinib versus erlotinib as second-line treatment of patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung (LUX-Lung 8): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND There is a major unmet need for effective treatments in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. LUX-Lung 8 compared afatinib (an irreversible ErbB family blocker) with erlotinib (a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor), as second-line treatment for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. METHODS We did this open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial at 183 cancer centres in 23 countries worldwide. We enrolled adults with stage IIIB or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the lung who had progressed after at least four cycles of platinum-based-chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or erlotinib (150 mg per day) until disease progression. The randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system and stratified by ethnic origin (eastern Asian vs non-eastern Asian). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). The key secondary endpoint was overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01523587. FINDINGS 795 eligible patients were randomly assigned (398 to afatinib, 397 to erlotinib). Median follow-up at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival was 6·7 months (IQR 3·1-10·2), at which point enrolment was not complete. Progression free-survival at the primary analysis was significantly longer with afatinib than with erlotinib (median 2·4 months [95% CI 1·9-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00], p=0·0427). At the time of the primary analysis of overall survival (median follow-up 18·4 months [IQR 13·8-22·4]), overall survival was significantly greater in the afatinib group than in the erloinib group (median 7·9 months [95% CI 7·2-8·7] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·8]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·95], p=0·0077), as were progression-free survival (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·1]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·96], p=0·0103) and disease control (201 [51%] of 398 patients vs 157 [40%] of 397; p=0·0020). The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (22 [6%] vs 11 [3%]; p=0·0551). Tumour shrinkage occurred in 103 (26%) of 398 patients versus 90 (23%) of 397 patients. Adverse event profiles were similar in each group: 224 (57%) of 392 patients in the afatinib group versus 227 (57%) of 395 in the erlotinib group had grade 3 or higher adverse events. We recorded higher incidences of treatment-related grade 3 diarrhoea with afatinib (39 [10%] vs nine [2%]), of grade 3 stomatitis with afatinib (16 [4%] vs none), and of grade 3 rash or acne with erlotinib (23 [6%] vs 41 [10%]). INTERPRETATION The significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival with afatinib compared with erlotinib, along with a manageable safety profile and the convenience of oral administration suggest that afatinib could be an additional option for the treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Erlotinib as second-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and asymptomatic brain metastases: a phase II study (CTONG–0803)

BACKGROUND This phase II, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of erlotinib as second-line therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with brain metastases (BM). PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-eight patients aged 18-75 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, confirmed adenocarcinoma or activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive NSCLC, and asymptomatic BM without extracranial progressive disease after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy were recruited. Treatment comprised erlotinib 150 mg/day. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) determined by RECIST. RESULTS The median PFS was 10.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.1-12.3] for intracranial progression and 9.7 months (95% CI 2.5-17.8) for intracranial and systemic progression. Patients with EGFR mutation-positive disease had significantly longer median PFS versus EGFR wild-type disease [15.2 months (95% CI 8.3-22.2) versus 4.4 months (95% CI 0.0-11.6); P = 0.02]. The median overall survival was 18.9 months (95% CI 14.4-23.4); 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 85% and 73%, respectively. Overall response rate was 58.3%. Most common adverse events were rash (77.1%), paronychia (20.8%), hyperbilirubinemia (16.7%), and diarrhea (14.6%); these were predominantly of grade 1/2. CONCLUSIONS Single-agent erlotinib was active and well tolerated in NSCLC patients with BM. Further studies are warranted.

Final overall survival results from a randomised, Phase III study of erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802)

BACKGROUND The OPTIMAL study was the first study to compare efficacy and tolerability of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) erlotinib, versus standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Findings from final overall survival (OS) analysis and assessment of post-study treatment impact are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS Of 165 randomised patients, 82 received erlotinib and 72 gemcitabine plus carboplatin. Final OS analyses were conducted when 70% of deaths had occurred in the intent-to-treat population. Subgroup OS was analysed by Cox proportional hazards model and included randomisation stratification factors and post-study treatments. RESULTS Median OS was similar between the erlotinib (22.8 months) and chemotherapy (27.2 months) arms with no significant between-group differences in the overall population [hazard ratio (HR), 1.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-1.71; P = 0.2663], the exon 19 deletion subpopulation (HR, 1.52; 95% CI 0.91-2.52; P = 0.1037) or the exon 21 L858 mutation subpopulation (HR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.55-1.54; P = 0.7392). More patients in the erlotinib arm versus the chemotherapy arm did not receive any post-study treatment (36.6% versus 22.2%). Patients who received sequential combination of EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy had significantly improved OS compared with those who received EGFR-TKI or chemotherapy only (29.7 versus 20.7 or 11.2 months, respectively; P < 0.0001). OS was significantly shorter in patients who did not receive post-study treatments compared with those who received subsequent treatments in both arms. CONCLUSION The significant OS benefit observed in patients treated with EGFR-TKI emphasises its contribution to improving survival of EGFR mutant NSCLC patients, suggesting that erlotinib should be considered standard first-line treatment of EGFR mutant patients and EGFR-TKI treatment following first-line therapy also brings significant benefits to those patients. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER NCT00874419.

BEYOND: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter, Phase III Study of First-Line Carboplatin/Paclitaxel Plus Bevacizumab or Placebo in Chinese Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE The phase III BEYOND trial was undertaken to confirm in a Chinese patient population the efficacy seen with first-line bevacizumab plus platinum doublet chemotherapy in globally conducted studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients age ≥ 18 years with locally advanced, metastatic, or recurrent advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin (area under the curve, 6) intravenously and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) intravenously (CP) on day 1 of each 3-week cycle, for ≤ six cycles, plus placebo (Pl+CP) or bevacizumab (B+CP) 15 mg/kg intravenously, on day 1 of each cycle, until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival, exploratory biomarkers, safety. RESULTS A total of 276 patients were randomly assigned, 138 to each arm. PFS was prolonged with B+CP versus Pl+CP (median, 9.2 v 6.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.54; P < .001). Objective response rate was improved with B+CP compared with Pl+CP (54% v 26%, respectively). Overall survival was also prolonged with B+CP compared with Pl+CP (median, 24.3 v 17.7 months, respectively; HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.93; P = .0154). Median PFS was 12.4 months with B+CP and 7.9 months with Pl+CP (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.63) in EGFR mutation-positive tumors and 8.3 and 5.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.53), in wild-type tumors. Safety was similar to previous studies of B+CP in NSCLC; no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION The addition to bevacizumab to carboplatin/paclitaxel was well tolerated and resulted in a clinically meaningful treatment benefit in Chinese patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC.

Quality of life (QoL) analyses from OPTIMAL (CTONG-0802), a phase III, randomised, open-label study of first-line erlotinib versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND The OPTIMAL study found that erlotinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus standard chemotherapy in Chinese patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This report describes the quality of life (QoL) and updated PFS analyses from this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Chinese patients ≥ 18 years with histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a confirmed activating mutation of EGFR (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R point mutation) received erlotinib (150 mg/day; n = 82) or gemcitabine-carboplatin (n = 72). The primary efficacy end point was PFS; QoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) questionnaire, Trial Outcome Index (TOI) and Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS). RESULTS Patients receiving erlotinib experienced clinically relevant improvements in QoL compared with the chemotherapy group in total FACT-L, TOI and LCS (P < 0.0001 for all scales). Erlotinib scored better than chemotherapy for all FACT-L subscales from baseline to cycles 2 and 4 (non-significant). In the updated analysis, PFS was significantly longer for erlotinib than chemotherapy (median PFS 13.7 versus 4.6 months; HR = 0.164, 95% CI = 0.105-0.256; P < 0.0001), which was similar to the previously reported primary analysis. CONCLUSION Erlotinib improves QoL compared with standard chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced NSCLC.