資訊|論壇|病例

搜索

首頁(yè) 醫(yī)學(xué)論壇 專業(yè)文章 醫(yī)學(xué)進(jìn)展 簽約作者 病例中心 快問(wèn)診所 愛(ài)醫(yī)培訓(xùn) 醫(yī)學(xué)考試 在線題庫(kù) 醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)議

您所在的位置:首頁(yè) > 腫瘤科醫(yī)學(xué)進(jìn)展 > [ASCO2015]LL8:阿法替尼 vs 厄洛替尼用于晚期肺鱗癌的二線治療

[ASCO2015]LL8:阿法替尼 vs 厄洛替尼用于晚期肺鱗癌的二線治療

2015-05-26 17:24 閱讀:2508 來(lái)源:醫(yī)脈通 作者:林* 責(zé)任編輯:林夕
[導(dǎo)讀] 2015年ASCO年會(huì)將于5月29日--6月2日在美國(guó)芝加哥召開(kāi),5月31日上午的非小細(xì)胞肺癌(NSCLC)口頭報(bào)告專場(chǎng),將公布LUX-Lung8(LL8)研究的總生存期結(jié)果,該研究對(duì)比了阿法替尼(A)和厄洛替尼(E)用于晚期肺鱗狀細(xì)胞癌(SCC)患者二線治療的療效,患者之前接

    2015年ASCO年會(huì)將于5月29日--6月2日在美國(guó)芝加哥召開(kāi),5月31日上午的非小細(xì)胞肺癌(NSCLC)口頭報(bào)告專場(chǎng),將公布LUX-Lung8(LL8)研究的總生存期結(jié)果,該研究對(duì)比了阿法替尼(A)和厄洛替尼(E)用于晚期肺鱗狀細(xì)胞癌(SCC)患者二線治療的療效,患者之前接受鉑類為基礎(chǔ)的化療。下面和大家提前分享這項(xiàng)研究的摘要。

    背景:晚期肺鱗癌患者在鉑類為基礎(chǔ)的化療之后針對(duì)疾病進(jìn)展的治療方案還比較有限。SCC的病理學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)EGFR、ErbB受體過(guò)表達(dá)和下游通路失調(diào)參與其中。LL8(肺鱗癌患者二線A vs E;A為不可逆的ErbB家族抑制劑,E為可逆的EGFR酪氨酸激酶抑制劑)的初步分析顯示阿法替尼可帶來(lái)更好的無(wú)進(jìn)展生存期(PFS)。本研究報(bào)告了OS和更新的PFS數(shù)據(jù)。

    方法:IIIB/IV期患者1:1隨機(jī)分配接受阿法替尼(40mg/d)或厄洛替尼(150mg/d)治療直到疾病進(jìn)展。主要終點(diǎn)。PFS;關(guān)鍵的次要終點(diǎn):OS.其他終點(diǎn):客觀緩解率(ORR),疾病控制率(DCR),患者報(bào)告的結(jié)局,安全性。

    結(jié)果:相比于接受厄洛替尼(n=397)治療,阿法替尼組(n=398)的OS明顯更好,可降低19%的死亡風(fēng)險(xiǎn)(中位OS:7.9 vs 6.8個(gè)月;HR,0.81;95%CI,0.69-095;p=0.008)。在6個(gè)月(63.6 vs 54.6%;p=0.010)、12個(gè)月(36.4 vs 28.2%;p=0.016)和18個(gè)月(22.0 vs 14.4%;p=0.013)可以看到OS的明顯差異。阿法替尼的PFS(2.6 vs 1.9個(gè)月;HR,0.81;95%CI,0.69-0.96;p=0.010)、ORR(5.5 vs 2.8%;p=0.055)和DCR(50.5 vs 39.5%;p=0.002)也明顯更優(yōu)。

    阿法替尼組有更多的患者出現(xiàn)整體健康狀況/質(zhì)量(35.7 vs 28.3%;p=0.041)、咳嗽(43.4 vs 35.2%;p=0.029)和呼吸困難(51.3 vs 44.1%;p=0.061)等癥狀的改善。兩組的不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況具有可比性(三級(jí)及以上的不良反應(yīng),A vs E:57.1% vs 57.5%)。阿法替尼組的藥物相關(guān)3/4級(jí)腹瀉(9.9/0.5 vs 2.3/0.3%)、3級(jí)口腔炎(4.1 vs 0%)的發(fā)生率更高。厄洛替尼組的3級(jí)皮疹/痤瘡的發(fā)生率更高(5.9 vs 10.4%)。

    結(jié)論:對(duì)于肺鱗癌患者的二線治療,阿法替尼相比厄洛替尼能明顯改善OS,PFS和DCR也明顯更好。此外,LL8研究中可以看到阿法替尼的不良反應(yīng)可控,還可帶來(lái)生活質(zhì)量的獲益以及癥狀控制,對(duì)于該類患者,阿法替尼應(yīng)該更優(yōu)于厄洛替尼。臨床試驗(yàn)信息:NCT01523587

    閱讀摘要原文

    Afatinib (A) vs erlotinib (E) as second-line therapy of patients (pts) with advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung following platinum-based chemotherapy: Overall survival (OS) **ysis from the global phase III trial LUX-Lung 8 (LL8)。(Abstract No:8002)Author(s): Jean-Charles Soria, Enriqueta Felip, Manuel Cobo, et alSession Type: Oral Abstract Session

    Background: Treatment options for pts with advanced SCC of the lung progressing after platinum-based chemotherapy are limited. Overexpression of EGFR, ErbB receptors and the dysregulation of their downstream pathways are implicated in SCC pathobiology. Primary **ysis of LL8 (2nd line A, an irreversible ErbB family blocker vs E, a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI; only TKI approved in this setting], in pts with SCC of the lung) showed significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) with A. OS and updated PFS are reported here.

    Methods: Pts with stage IIIB/IV disease were randomized 1:1 to receive A (40 mg/day) or E (150 mg/day) until disease progression. Primary endpoint: PFS; key secondary endpoint: OS. Other endpoints: objective response (ORR), disease control (DCR), patient reported outcomes and safety. 632 events and a sample size of 800 pts was needed to detect a HR of 0.8 with 80% power for OS.

    Results: OS was significantly better with A (n = 398) vs E (n = 397), with a 19% reduced risk of death (median 7.9 vs 6.8 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.95]; p = 0.008)。 Significant differences in OS were seen at 6 (63.6 vs 54.6%; p = 0.010), 12 (36.4 vs 28.2%; p = 0.016) and 18 (22.0 vs 14.4%; p = 0.013) mos. PFS (median 2.6 vs 1.9 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.96]; p = 0.010), ORR (5.5 vs 2.8%; p = 0.055) and DCR (50.5 vs 39.5%; p = 0.002) were all better for A vs E. More pts had improved global health status/quality of life (35.7 vs 28.3%; p = 0.041), cough (43.4 vs 35.2%; p = 0.029) and dyspnea (51.3 vs 44.1%; p = 0.061) with A vs E. Adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable (G ≥ 3 AEs: 57.1 and 57.5% for A vs E) with a higher incidence of drug-related G3/4 diarrhea (9.9/0.5 vs 2.3/0.3%), G3 stomatitis (4.1 vs 0%) with A and a higher incidence of G3 rash/acne with E (5.9 vs 10.4%)。 Preliminary data from FoundationOne **ysis of tumor blocks will be shown.

    Conclusions: A significantly improved OS vs E in pts with SCC of the lung in a 2nd line setting. PFS and DCR were also significantly better. With a manageable AE profile, added QoL benefit, and symptom control seen in LL8, A should be preferred over E for these pts. Clinical trial ***rmation: NCT01523587


分享到:
  版權(quán)聲明:

  本站所注明來(lái)源為"愛(ài)愛(ài)醫(yī)"的文章,版權(quán)歸作者與本站共同所有,非經(jīng)授權(quán)不得轉(zhuǎn)載。

  本站所有轉(zhuǎn)載文章系出于傳遞更多信息之目的,且明確注明來(lái)源和作者,不希望被轉(zhuǎn)載的媒體或個(gè)人可與我們

  聯(lián)系z(mì)lzs@120.net,我們將立即進(jìn)行刪除處理

意見(jiàn)反饋 關(guān)于我們 隱私保護(hù) 版權(quán)聲明 友情鏈接 聯(lián)系我們

Copyright 2002-2024 Iiyi.Com All Rights Reserved