Randomized, Multicenter Study of Gefitinib Dose-escalation in Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Patients Achieved Stable Disease after One-month Gefitinib Treatment

Body Mass Index, Weight Loss, and Mortality Risk in Advanced-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Focus on EGFR Mutation

Body mass index (BMI) influences the prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), including both early-stage and late-stage NSCLC patients that are undergoing chemotherapies. However, earlier research on the relationship between BMI and survival in patients taking epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) yielded contradictory results. These publications either had a limited number of patients or were getting TKIs in various lines of therapy, which might explain why the outcomes were contradictory. As a result, we undertook retrospective study to examine the effect of BMI on survival outcomes in patients with advanced EGFR mutant NSCLC receiving first-line EGFR-TKIs. We also compared the findings to those with wild-type EGFR. Between November 2010 and March 2014, 513 patients with advanced NSCLC were enrolled in the study. According to the adjusted BMI cut-off point for Asia, 35 out of 513 (6.8%) patients were underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²), whereas 197 (38.4%) were overweight (BMI > 24 kg/m²). Overweight patients with wild-type EGFR exhibited longer progression-free survival (4.6 vs. 2.1 months, p = 0.003) and overall survival (OS) (8.9 vs. 4.3 months, p = 0.003) than underweight patients. Overweight patients with EGFR mutations had a longer OS than normal-weight patients (23.0 vs. 20.2 months, p = 0.025). Bodyweight reduction was related to a shorter OS in both the mutant EGFR patients (17.1 vs. 30.5 months, p < 0.001) and the wild-type EGFR patients (7.8 vs. 18.7 months, p < 0.001). In conclusion, advanced stages NSCLC patients with a lower BMI and early weight loss had a worse outcome that was independent of EGFR mutation status.

Safety and CSF distribution of high-dose erlotinib and gefitinib in patients of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases

PURPOSE

Patients of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases have limited treatment options. High-dose erlotinib (HDE) and gefitinib (HDG) have been tried in the past. This study investigates the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) disposition and safety of both, high-dose erlotinib and gefitinib regimens.

METHODS

Eleven and nine patients were treated with erlotinib and gefitinib, respectively. All patients received 1 week of standard dose of erlotinib (150 mg OD) or gefitinib (250 mg OD), followed by the high dose (1500 mg weekly for erlotinib and 1250 mg OD for gefitinib) from day 8. Blood and CSF samples were collected on days 7 and 15, 4 h after the morning dose and drug levels determined using LC-MS/MS. Adverse events were documented as per CTCAE 4.03 till day 15.

RESULTS

Pulsatile HDE and daily HDG resulted in 1.4- and 1.9-fold increase in CSF levels, respectively. A constant 2% CSF penetration rate was observed across both doses of erlotinib, while for gefitinib the penetration rate for high dose was half that of the standard dose suggesting a nonlinear disposition. Three patients on HDE treatment discontinued treatment after the first dose due to intolerable toxicities, whereas HDG was better tolerated with no treatment discontinuations. Since CSF disposition of gefitinib followed saturable kinetics, a lower dose of 750 mg was found to achieve CSF concentrations comparable to that of the 1250 mg dose.

CONCLUSIONS

HDG was better tolerated than HDE. CSF disposition of gefitinib was found to be saturable at a higher dose. Based on these findings, the dose of 750 mg OD should be considered for further evaluation in this setting.

Gefitinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of gefitinib for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is evolving. We undertook a systematic review to evaluate the available evidence from all randomised trials.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of gefitinib as first-line, second-line or maintenance treatment for advanced NSCLC.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase from inception to 17 February 2017. We handsearched relevant conference proceedings, clinical trial registries and references lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials assessing gefitinib, alone or in combination with other treatment, compared to placebo or other treatments in the first- or successive-line treatment of patients with NSCLC, excluding compassionate use.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed the search results to select those with sound methodological quality. We carried out all analyses on an intention-to-treat basis. We recorded the following outcome data: overall survival, progression-free survival, toxicity, tumour response and quality of life. We also collected data for the following subgroups: Asian ethnicity and positive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which examined 12,089 patients.General populationGefitinib did not statistically improve overall survival when compared with placebo or chemotherapy in either first- or second-line settings. Second-line gefitinib prolonged time to treatment failure (TTF) (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 0.90, P < 0.0001) when compared with placebo. Maintenance gefitinib improved progression-free survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.91, P = 0.007) after first-line therapy.Studies in patients of Asian ethnicity or that conducted subgroup analysesSecond-line gefitinib prolonged overall survival over placebo (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.91, P = 0.01). In the first-line setting, progression-free survival was improved with gefitinib over chemotherapy alone (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.98, P = 0.04, moderate quality of evidence). Gefitinib given in combination with a chemotherapy regimen improved progression-free survival versus either gefitinib alone or chemotherapy alone (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.96, P = 0.03; HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.77, P < 0.00001, respectively). In the second-line setting, progression-free survival was superior in patients given gefitinib over placebo or chemotherapy (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.91, P = 0.009; HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.88, P = 0.002; moderate quality of evidence, respectively). Combining gefitinib with chemotherapy in the second-line setting was superior to gefitinib alone (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.97, P = 0.04). As maintenance therapy, gefitinib improved progression-free survival when compared with placebo (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.54, P < 0.00001).Patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumoursStudies in patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumours showed an improvement in progression-free survival in favour of gefitinib over first-line and second-line chemotherapy (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.61, P < 0.00001; HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.47, P < 0.0001, respectively). Gefitinib as maintenance therapy following chemotherapy improved overall and progression-free survival (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.98, P = 0.05; HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41, P < 0.0001, respectively) in one phase III study when compared to placebo.Toxicities from gefitinib included skin rash, diarrhoea and liver transaminase derangements. Toxicities from chemotherapy included anaemia, neutropenia and neurotoxicity.In terms of quality of life, gefitinib improved Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) (standardised mean difference (SMD) 10.50, 95% CI 9.55 to 11.45, P < 0.000001), lung cancer subscale (SMD 3.63, 95% CI 3.08 to 4.19, P < 0.00001) and Trial Outcome Index (SMD 9.87, 95% CI 1.26 to 18.48, P < 0.00001) scores when compared with chemotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review shows that gefitinib, when compared with standard first- or second-line chemotherapy or maintenance therapy, probably has a beneficial effect on progression-free survival and quality of life in selected patient populations, particularly those with tumours bearing sensitising EGFR mutations.Patients with EGFR mutations lived longer when given maintenance gefitinib than those given placebo.One study conducted subgroup analysis and showed that gefitinib improved overall survival over placebo in the second-line setting in patients of Asian ethnicity. All other studies did not detect any benefit on overall survival. The data analysed in this review were very heterogenous. We were limited in the amount of data that could be pooled, largely due to variations in study design. The risk of bias in most studies was moderate, with some studies not adequately addressing potential selection, attrition and reporting bias. This heterogeneity may have an impact on the applicability of the resultsCombining gefitinib with chemotherapy appears to be superior in improving progression-free survival to either gefitinib or chemotherapy alone, however further data and phase III studies in these settings are required.Gefitinib has a favourable toxicity profile when compared with current chemotherapy regimens. Although there is no improvement in overall survival, gefitinib compares favourably with cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with EGFR mutations with a prolongation of progression-free survival and a lesser side effect profile.

Danshen improves survival of patients with advanced lung cancer and targeting the relationship between macrophages and lung cancer cells

In traditional Chinese medicine, Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge (danshen) is widely used in the treatment of numerous cancers. However, its clinical effort and mechanism in the treatment of advanced lung cancer are unclear. In our study, the in vivo protective effort of danshen in patients with advanced lung cancer were validated using data from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. We observed in vitro that dihydroisotanshinone I (DT), a bioactive compound in danshen, exerts anticancer effects through many pathways. First, 10 μM DT substantially inhibited the migration ability of lung cancer cells in both macrophage and macrophage/lung cancer direct mixed coculture media. Second, 10 μM DT repressed the phosphorylation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3), the protein expression of S-phase kinase associated protein-2 (Skp2), and the mRNA levels of STAT3-related genes, including chemokine (C–C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2). In addition, 10 μM DT suppressed the macrophage recruitment ability of lung cancer cells by reducing CCL2 secretion from both macrophages and lung cancer cells. Third, 20 μM DT induced apoptosis in lung cancer cells. Furthermore, DT treatment significantly inhibited the final tumor volume in a xenograft nude mouse model. In conclusion, danshen exerts protective efforts in patients with advanced lung cancer. These effects can be attributed to DT-mediated interruption of the cross talk between lung cancer cells and macrophages and blocking of lung cancer cell proliferation.

Mixed micelles of lipoic acid-chitosan-poly(ethylene glycol) and distearoylphosphatidylethanolamine-poly(ethylene glycol) for tumor delivery

Many chemotherapeutics suffer from poor aqueous solubility and tissue selectivity. Distearoylphosphatidylethanolamine-poly(ethylene glycol) (DSPE-PEG) micelles are a promising formulation strategy for the delivery of hydrophobic anticancer drugs. However, storage and in vivo instability restrict their use. The aim of this study was to prepare mixed micelles, containing a novel polymer, lipoic acid-chitosan-poly(ethylene glycol) (LACPEG), and DSPE-PEG, to overcome these limitations and potentially increase cancer cell internalisation. Drug-loaded micelles were prepared with a model tyrosine kinase inhibitor and characterized for size, surface charge, stability, morphology, drug entrapment efficiency, cell viability (A549 and PC-9 cell lines), in vivo biodistribution, ex vivo tumor accumulation and cellular internalisation. Micelles of size 30-130nm with entrapment efficiencies of 46-81% were prepared. LACPEG/DSPE-PEG mixed micelles showed greater interaction with the drug (condensing to half their size following entrapment), greater stability, and a safer profile in vitro compared to DSPE-PEG micelles. LACPEG/DSPE-PEG and DSPE-PEG micelles had similar entrapment efficiencies and in vivo tumor accumulation levels, but LACPEG/DSPE-PEG micelles showed higher tumor cell internalisation. Collectively, these findings suggest that LACPEG/DSPE-PEG mixed micelles provide a promising platform for tumor delivery of hydrophobic drugs.