Efficacy and Prognosis of First-Line EGFR-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Treatment in Older Adults Including Poor Performance Status Patients with EGFR-Mutated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Rebiopsy Enhances Survival with Afatinib vs. Osimertinib in EGFR Exon 19 Deletion Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Multicenter Study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Afatinib and Osimertinib are first-line treatments for EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but their comparative efficacies and the patient groups that benefit the most remain unclear. This multicenter retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of first-line Afatinib and Osimertinib in NSCLC patients with EGFR 19del and no brain metastases at diagnosis.

METHODS

The primary endpoints were time on treatment (ToT) and overall survival (OS). Survival analyses were performed for three groups: Afatinib followed by Osimertinib, Afatinib followed by other therapies, and Osimertinib (alone or followed by other therapies). Rebiopsy practices, including T790M mutation detection, were also analyzed in patients with disease progression on Afatinib.

RESULTS

Among 97 Afatinib-treated and 60 Osimertinib-treated patients, Osimertinib showed a significantly longer ToT (23.3 vs. 16.5 months; p = 0.007). Median OS was numerically higher for Afatinib with sequential Osimertinib (40.5 vs. 34.6 months for Osimertinib; p = 0.473). Osimertinib demonstrated advantages, with fewer brain metastases upon progression and fewer adverse effects. In the Afatinib group, 64% of patients with disease progression underwent rebiopsy, with 39% testing positive for T790M mutation and subsequently receiving Osimertinib. Rebiopsy was most frequently performed on the lung parenchyma using non-surgical methods.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, Osimertinib achieved a significantly longer ToT compared to Afatinib in NSCLC patients with EGFR 19del and no brain metastases. The sequential use of Afatinib followed by Osimertinib showed a trend toward improved OS, highlighting the importance of rebiopsy for identifying T790M mutations to guide subsequent therapy.

Survival prognostic factors in nonsmall cell lung cancer patients with simultaneous brain metastases and poor performance status at initial presentation

Purpose

Although the treatment of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has rapidly progressed recently, there is little evidence of treatment for patients with symptomatic brain metastases (BM) and poor performance status (PS). However, in symptomatic BM patients, appropriate upfront intracranial treatment can often lead to rapid improvement in PS and effective systemic therapy. Thus, this study investigated the prognostic factors for the survival of poor PS NSCLC patients with synchronous BM.

Methods

Data of patients with BM and Karnofsky PS (KPS) ≤70 at the first diagnosis of NSCLC who were treated in our hospital between January 2017 and December 2021 were reviewed. Patient survival was compared among patients stratified by type of first-line regimen of systemic treatment. Correlations between patient characteristics and survival were examined.

Results

Fifty patients receiving aggressive treatment were enrolled. The median survival times for tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), and chemotherapy alone groups were 19 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.8-68.5), 19 (3.0-62.0), and 13 (1.2-24.8) months, respectively. Survival in the TKI and ICI groups was significantly longer than in the chemotherapy alone group (p = 0.046, TKI vs. chemo; p = 0.022, ICI vs. chemo; p = 0.023). Both sex and type of systemic treatment correlated to survival time on univariate analysis. Chemotherapy alone for systemic treatment [p = 0.034; hazard ratio (HR), 0.44 (0.20-0.94)] remained significant for predicting overall survival in the multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

Even in patients with poor PS and BM at the initial diagnosis of NSCLC, the ICI group had a survival time comparable to that of the TKI group when combined with tailor-made intracranial treatment. There is a subgroup in the patient population that was previously considered unsuitable for ICI, whose PS improves with individualized intracranial treatment, and who may benefit from immunotherapy.

Clinical Management of Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Brain Metastases, and Actionable Genomic Alterations: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Nearly 60% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) present with metastatic disease, and approximately 20% have brain metastases (BrMs) at diagnosis. During the disease course, 25-50% of patients will develop BrMs. Despite available treatments, survival rates for patients with NSCLC and BrMs remain low, and their overall prognosis is poor. Even with newer agents for NSCLC, options for treating BrMs can be limited by their ineffective transport across the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and the unique brain tumor microenvironment. The presence of actionable genomic alterations (AGAs) is a key determinant of optimal treatment selection, which aims to maximize responses and minimize toxicities. The objective of this systematic literature review (SLR) was to understand the current landscape of the clinical management of patients with NSCLC and BrMs, particularly those with AGAs.

METHOD

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA)-compliant SLR was conducted to identify studies in patients with BrMs in NSCLC. Searches used the EMBASE and MEDLINE® databases, and articles published between January 1, 2017 and September 26, 2022 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Overall, 179 studies were included in the SLR. This subset review focused on 80 studies that included patients with NSCLC, BrMs, and AGAs (19 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], two single-arm studies, and 59 observational studies). Sixty-four of the 80 studies reported on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, 14 on anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) alterations, and two on both alterations. Ninety-five percent of studies evaluated targeted therapy. All RCTs allowed patients with previously treated, asymptomatic, or neurologically stable BrMs; the percentage of asymptomatic BrMs varied across observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although targeted therapies demonstrate systemic benefits for patients with NSCLC, BrMs, and AGAs, there remains a continued need for effective therapies to treat and prevent BrMs in this population. Increased BBB permeability of emerging therapies may improve outcomes for this population.

The difference between dacomitinib and afatinib in effectiveness and safety in first-line treatment of patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world observational study

OBJECTIVES

The irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) afatinib and dacomitinib 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 dacomitinib in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between September 2020 and March 2023, we retrospectively recruited patients diagnosed with advanced-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were treated with first-line irreversible EGFR-TKIs. The enrolled patients were assigned to two groups based on whether they received afatinib or dacomitinib.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients were enrolled in the study (70 to afatinib and 31 to dacomitinib). The partial response rates (PR) for first-line treatment with afatinib and dacomitinib were 85.7 and 80.6% (p = 0.522). The median progression-free survival (PFS) (18.9 vs. 16.3 months, p = 0.975) and time to treatment failure (TTF) (22.7 vs. 15.9 months, p = 0.324) in patients with afatinib and dacomitinib treatment were similar. There was no significant difference observed in the median PFS (16.1 vs. 18.9 months, p = 0.361) and TTF (32.5 vs. 19.6 months, p = 0.182) between patients receiving the standard dose and those receiving the reduced dose. In terms of side effects, the incidence of diarrhea was higher in the afatinib group (75.8% vs. 35.5%, p <  0.001), while the incidence of paronychia was higher in the dacomitinib group (58.1% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.004). The PFS (17.6 vs. 24.9 months, p = 0.663) and TTF (21.3 vs. 25.1 months, p = 0.152) were similar between patients younger than 75 years and those older than 75 years.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that afatinib and dacomitinib had similar effectiveness and safety profiles. However, they have slightly different side effects. Afatinib and dacomitinib can be safely administered to patients across different age groups with appropriate dose reductions.

Brain metastasis, EGFR mutation subtype and generation of EGFR-TKI jointly influence the treatment outcome of patient with EGFR-mutant NSCLC

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation is brain metastasis (BM)-prone. We determined the impact of this hallmark, along with EGFR subtype and generation of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment, on patients' outcome. 553 metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients received front-line EGFR-TKI treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and secondary T790M rate were analysed. BM was observed in 211 (38.2%) patients. BM (HR 1.20 [95% CI 0.99-1.48]; p = 0.053), ECOG PS 0-1 (HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.54-0.93]; p = 0.014) and afatinib treatment (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.66-0.99]; p = 0.045) were associated with PFS. Afatinib-treated patients without BM demonstrated a significantly longer PFS (16.3 months) compared to afatinib-treated patients with BM (13.7 months) and to gefitinib/erlotinib-treated patients with (11.1 months) or without BM (14.2 months; p < 0.001). CNS-only progression trended higher in afatinib-treated patients. ECOG PS 0-1 (HR 0.41 [95% CI 0.31-0.56]; p < 0.001) and EGFR L858R mutation (HR 1.46 [95% CI 1.13-1.88]; p = 0.003), but not BM, were the predictors for OS. BM (OR 2.02 [95% CI 1.02-4.08]; p = 0.040), afatinib treatment (OR 0.26 [95% CI 0.12-0.50]; p < 0.001) and EGFR L858R mutation (OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.28-1.05]; p = 0.070) were associated with secondary T790M rate. In BM patients, gefitinib/erlotinib-treated ones with 19 deletion mutation and afatinib-treated ones with L858R mutation had the highest and the lowest T790M rate (94.4% vs. 27.3%, p < 0.001), respectively. BM and generation of EGFR-TKI jointly impact PFS and secondary T790M rate in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, whereas OS was mainly associated with EGFR subtype.

Survival outcomes of east Asian patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A network meta-analysis of real-world evidence

BACKGROUND

The comparative efficacies of different generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remain largely unknown. Moreover, whether one EGFR-TKI confers superior survival remains unclear, especially in East Asians. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the survival outcomes of East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC treated with first-line EGFR-TKIs.

METHODS

The NMA included observational real-world evidence studies on adult patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC who received first (gefitinib and erlotinib), second (afatinib), or third (osimertinib) generation EGFR-TKIs as frontline therapy. Studies were identified through an online bibliographic search of Medline articles in the PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases.

RESULTS

For overall survival (OS), afatinib had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) than osimertinib (HR: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.91), gefitinib (HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.43-0.72), and erlotinib (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.92). For progression-free survival (PFS), afatinib had significantly better HRs than gefitinib (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.36-0.56) and erlotinib (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.49-0.81). Moreover, afatinib was most likely to achieve the longest OS (81.3%), followed by erlotinib (13%), osimertinib, and gefitinib. Furthermore, afatinib was most likely to achieve the longest PFS (48.3%), followed by osimertinib (34.9%) and erlotinib.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world evidence shows that afatinib confers better survival than other first-line EGFR-TKIs in East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC.

Do patient characteristics affect EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment outcomes? A network meta-analysis of real-world survival outcomes of East Asian patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with first-line EGFR-TKIs

BACKGROUND

Despite the well-established efficacies of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), there is limited real-world evidence comparing their effectiveness according to patients' clinical characteristics. This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared survival outcomes among first-line EGFR-TKIs in different subgroups of East Asian patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

This NMA included real-world observational studies reporting outcomes with TKIs in patients aged >65 years, with baseline brain metastasis, with different Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) statuses, or with different common EGFR mutation types.

RESULTS

In patients with the EGFR L858R mutation, afatinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.75) and gefitinib (HR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.32-0.53). Similarly, in patients with the EGFR Del19 mutation, afatinib and erlotinib resulted in significantly longer PFS than gefitinib (HR: 0.48 with 95% CI: 0.33-0.71 and HR: 0.54 with 95% CI: 0.36-0.80, respectively). Moreover, afatinib resulted in significantly longer PFS than gefitinib in patients with brain metastasis (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.33-0.87) or ECOG status 0-1 (HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.23-0.59).

CONCLUSION

This NMA suggests that afatinib results in similar PFS to erlotinib and superior PFS than gefitinib in patients with Del19 mutant NSCLC, aged ≥65 years, with ECOG scores of 0-1, and with baseline brain metastasis.

Improved survival and intracranial tumor control of EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with newly developed brain metastases following stereotactic radiosurgery and EGFR-TKI: a large retrospective cohort study and meta-analyses

PURPOSE

To examine the differential effects of SRS and TKI on EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with brain metastases (BMs) and outcomes following continuation of the same TKI agent in case of new BMs.

METHODS

This study included 608 NSCLC patients (2,274 BMs) while meta-analyses included 1,651 NSCLC patients (> 3,944 BMs). Overall survival (OS) and intracranial progression free survival (iPFS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios (95% CI) of prognostic factors were estimated using Cox regression models.

RESULTS

The median OS/iPFS (95% CI) (months) for patients with wildtype EGFR/ALK, EGFR mutations, and ALK rearrangements were 17.7 (12.9-23.6)/12.1 (9.8-15.6), 28.9 (23.8-33.3)/17.7 (14.8-21.2), and 118.0 (not reached)/71.7 (15.1-not reached), respectively. In EGFR-mutated patients, meta-analyses combining our data showed significantly improved OS and iPFS of patients who received SRS and TKI (OS:35.1 months, iPFS:20.0 months) when compared to those who have SRS alone (OS:20.8 months, iPFS:11.8 months) or TKI alone (OS:24.3 months, iPFS:13.8 months). Having SRS for newly diagnosed BMs while keeping the existing TKI agent yielded OS (30.0 vs. 32.1 months, p = 0.200) non-inferior to patients who started combined SRS and TKI therapy for their newly diagnosed NSCLC with BMs. Multivariable analyses showed that good performance score and TKI therapy were associated with improved outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined SRS and TKI resulted in favorable outcomes in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with newly diagnosed BMs. Continuation of the same TKI agent plus SRS in case of new brain metastases yielded good clinical outcomes and may be considered a standard-of-care treatment.

The Effects of a Curcumin Derivative and Osimertinib on Fatty Acyl Metabolism and Mitochondrial Functions in HCC827 Cells and Tumors

Drug combination therapy is a key approach in cancer treatments, aiming to improve therapeutic efficacy and overcome drug resistance. Evaluation of intracellular response in cancer cells to drug treatment may disclose the underlying mechanism of drug resistance. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effect of osimertinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and a curcumin derivative, 35d, on HCC827 cells and tumors by analyzing alterations in metabolome and related regulations. HCC827 tumor-bearing SCID mice and cultured HCC827 cells were separately examined. The treatment comprised four conditions: vehicle-only, 35d-only, osimertinib-only, and a combination of 35d and osimertinib. The treated tumors/cells were subsequently subjected to metabolomics profiling, fatty acyl analysis, mitochondrial potential measurement, and cell viability assay. Osimertinib induced changes in the ratio of short-chain (SC) to long-chain (LC) fatty acyls, particularly acylcarnitines (ACs), in both tumors and cells. Furthermore, 35d enhanced this effect by further lowering the SC/LC ratio of most ACs. Osimertinib and 35d also exerted detrimental effects on mitochondria through distinct mechanisms. Osimertinib upregulated the expression of carnitine palmitoyltransferase I (CPTI), while 35d induced the expression of heat shock protein 60 (HSP60). The alterations in ACs and CPTI were correlated with mitochondrial dysfunction and inhibited cell growth. Our results suggest that osimertinib and 35d disrupted the fatty acyl metabolism and induced mitochondrial stress in cancer cells. This study provides insights into the potential application of fatty acyl metabolism inhibitors, such as osimertinib or other TKIs, and mitochondrial stress inducers, such as curcumin derivatives, as combination therapy for cancer.

Upfront Advanced Radiotherapy and New Drugs for NSCLC Patients with Synchronous Brain Metastases: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? A Real-World Analysis from Lombardy, Italy

AIM

Healthcare administrative databases represent a valuable source for real-life data analysis. The primary aim of this study is to compare effectiveness and cost profile in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring synchronous brain metastases (BMs) who received non-chemo first-line systemic therapy with or without advanced radiotherapy (aRT).

METHODS

Diagnostic ICD-9-CM codes were used for identifying all patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer between 2012 and 2019. Among these, patients who had started a first-line systemic treatment with either TKIs or pembrolizumab, alone or in combination with intensity-modulated or stereotactic RT, were selected. Clinical outcomes investigated included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment failure (TTF). The cost outcome was defined as the average per capita cumulative healthcare direct costs of the treatment, including all inpatient and outpatient costs.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 177 patients, of whom 58 were treated with systemic treatment plus aRT (STRT) and 119 with systemic treatment alone. The addition of aRT to systemic treatment was associated with a significantly better OS (p = 0.020) and PFS (p = 0.041) than systemic therapy alone. The ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) value indicated an average cost of €3792 for each month of survival after STRT treatment and confirmed clinical effectiveness but higher healthcare costs.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study suggests that upfront aRT for NCLSC patients with synchronous BMs represents a valid treatment strategy, boosting the efficacy of novel and emerging drug classes with sustainable costs for the health service.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The present real-world study reports that the use of upfront advanced radiotherapyaRT and new-generation systemic agents, such as TKIs and pembrolizumab, may have higher oncological control and an improved cost-effectiveness profile than the use of new-generation systemic agents alone in NCLSC patients with synchronous brain metastases. Acquired evidence can also be used to inform policymakers that adding advanced radiotherapy results is a sustainable cost for the health service. Since approximately 50% of patients do not meet RCT inclusion criteria, a significant proportion of them is receiving treatment that is not evidence-informed; therefore, these results warrant further studies to identify the best radiotherapy timing and possible dose escalation approaches to improving treatment efficacy in patient subgroups not typically represented in randomized controlled trials.