Similar outcomes obtained with four adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens

The phase III E1505 trial was designed to investigate the addition of bevacizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early-stage, completely resected NSCLC. It was based on the rationale that the benefit of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is modest in this population. E1505 included 1,501 patients with completely resected, stage IB NSCLC. They were randomised to either 4 cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy only or the same chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for up to one year. Four chemotherapy regimens per investigator choice were allowed: cisplatin/ vinorelbine, cisplatin/ docetaxel, cisplatin/ gemcitabine, and cisplatin/ pemetrexed.

E1505 was powered for the primary endpoint of OS only and was stopped early for futility. The updated results presented at the ASCO Congress confirm the lack of difference between the two treatment arms with regard to OS and DFS; the hazard ratio was 0.99 for both endpoints.

This analysis also focussed on outcomes based on chemotherapy subsets. Patients were pooled with respect to the regimen used regardless of treatment arm (with or without bevacizumab) and divided into non-squamous and squamous cohorts to account for the restriction of pemetrexed administration to patients with non-squamous histology. DFS and OS were calculated for each chemotherapy group.

This post-hoc, non-randomised subset analysis yielded no differences for OS and DFS across all four adjuvant cisplatin- based chemotherapy regimens in both squamous and non-squamous tumours. Moreover, hazard ratios were calculated using vinorelbine as a reference, because cisplatin/ vinorelbine had been the regimen used in prior adjuvant trials. Again, no significant differences were noted for patients with both histologies.

REFERENCES

  1. Wakelee HA et al., Adjuvant chemotherapy bevacizumab for early stage NSCLC: Outcomes based on chemotherapy subsets. J Clin Oncol
    34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 8507)

More posts

PFS improvement due to local therapy in oligometastatic NSCLC

Evidence suggests the existence of a ,limited metastatic’ NSCLC phenotype. However, the type of optimal treatment and the role of aggressive local therapy in these patients remain controversial. Gomez et al. presented the first prospective, randomised trial to address this question. Patients had stage IV disease without RECIST progression and a maximum of three metastases after front-line systemic therapy (FLST).

Locally advanced NSCLC: oral vinorelbine shows better safety profile than etoposide

The randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase II RENO trial was conducted with the objective of establishing a standard chemotherapy regimen in the setting of chemo-radiotherapy of locally advanced NSCLC. A total of 134 patients with inoperable stage III NSCLC received either oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin or etoposide plus cisplatin.

ULTIMATE: chemotherapy plus bevacizumab beyond first line

As chemotherapy in the second-line or third-line settings of NSCLC shows limited efficacy, the phase III, randomised ULTIMATE trial tested the combination of chemotherapy and bevacizumab in patients with advanced NSCLC of non-squamous histology, who had progressed after one or two lines of treatment.

New approaches are raising hope for SCLC patients

Only minor progress has been made over the past 30 to 40 years in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), which accounts for 10 % to 15 % of lung cancer cases. SCLC is radiosensitive, but approximately 70 % of patients present with extended disease that cannot be included within one radiotherapy field. The majority of patients respond to first-line chemotherapy.

Mutational analysis: on the road to refined standards

The Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium (LCMC) is a multi-institutional consortium for the study of driver mutations of lung adenocarcinoma. The cooperating sites enable the identification of relatively large numbers of patients with uncommon and rare alterations, facilitate the analysis of their clinical characteristics, and lay the ground for targeted therapy trials.

“The importance of first-line and second-line targeted agents is obvious”

Which parameters should be taken into consideration regarding the choice of EGFR TKIs in a lung cancer patient with an activating EGFR mutation? When EGFR mutations are diagnosed in the first-line setting, we have the luxury of having three options today. However, it is important to discriminate between the different types.