Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib Beyond Progression in Advanced Erlotinib-Responsive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Balazs Halmos1, Nathan A Pennell2, Pingfu Fu3

  • 1Division of Hematology/Oncology, Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA axd44@case.edu bahalmos@montefiore.org.

The Oncologist
|August 27, 2015
PubMed
Abstract

Insights

Continuing erlotinib with chemotherapy after progression in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) showed no progression-free survival benefit. This approach also led to increased toxicity compared to chemotherapy alone.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Medical Research
  • Clinical Trials

Background:

  • Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is effective for advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
  • Acquired resistance to EGFR TKI therapy is common, leaving the benefit of continuing treatment beyond progression uncertain.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate if continuing erlotinib (ERL) with chemotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in NSCLC patients who previously benefited from erlotinib.
  • To assess the safety and efficacy of combining chemotherapy with continued erlotinib in the second- or third-line setting.

Main Methods:

  • A randomized phase II study compared chemotherapy alone (Arm A) versus chemotherapy plus erlotinib (Arm B) in patients with progressive NSCLC after clinical benefit from erlotinib.
  • Erlotinib was administered at 150 mg daily on days 2-19 of each cycle in Arm B to minimize pharmacodynamic interactions.
  • The primary endpoint was a 50% extension in PFS for the combination arm.

Main Results:

  • 46 patients were randomized; patient characteristics were balanced.
  • Median PFS was 5.5 months in Arm A and 4.4 months in Arm B (p = .699).
  • Response rates were 13% (Arm A) and 16% (Arm B) (p = .79). No significant PFS difference was observed for continuing erlotinib in mutation-positive patients. Arm B experienced substantially more toxicity.

Conclusions:

  • Continuation of erlotinib beyond progression with chemotherapy offers no benefit in PFS compared to chemotherapy alone.
  • The combination arm showed significantly increased toxicity, suggesting it is not a beneficial strategy.
  • These findings argue against the routine practice of continuing erlotinib in this patient population.