Explore the vast range of titles available.

Osimertinib was compared with standard EGFR blockers among patients with non–small-cell lung cancer with activating mutations in EGFR . The median overall survival was 38.6 months with osimertinib and 31.8 months with erlotinib or gefitinib. This 20% lower risk of death was noted despite the crossover of patients from standard therapy to osimertinib during subsequent therapy.

G12C is a mutation that occurs in approximately 3 to 4% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Monotherapy with KRAS G12C inhibitors has yielded only modest efficacy. Combining the KRAS G12C inhibitor sotorasib with panitumumab, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, may be an effective strategy. In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, we assigned patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer with mutated G12C who had not received previous treatment with a KRAS G12C inhibitor to receive sotorasib at a dose of 960 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), sotorasib at a dose of 240 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), or the investigator's choice of trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib (standard care; 54 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Key secondary end points were overall survival and objective response. After a median follow-up of 7.8 months (range, 0.1 to 13.9), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 6.3) and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.8) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab and 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab groups, respectively, as compared with 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.9) in the standard-care group. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group as compared with the standard-care group was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.80; P = 0.006), and the hazard ratio in the 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; P = 0.03). Overall survival data are maturing. The objective response was 26.4% (95% CI, 15.3 to 40.3), 5.7% (95% CI, 1.2 to 15.7), and 0% (95% CI, 0.0 to 6.6) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, and standard-care groups, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 35.8%, 30.2%, and 43.1% of patients, respectively. Skin-related toxic effects and hypomagnesemia were the most common adverse events observed with sotorasib-panitumumab. In this phase 3 trial of a KRAS G12C inhibitor plus an EGFR inhibitor in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer, both doses of sotorasib in combination with panitumumab resulted in longer progression-free survival than standard treatment. Toxic effects were as expected for either agent alone and resulted in few discontinuations of treatment. (Funded by Amgen; CodeBreaK 300 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05198934.).

Amivantamab, an antibody against MET and EGFR, plus lazertinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, induced a response in 86% of previously untreated patients and led to a median progression-free survival of nearly 2 years.

Osimertinib (AZD9291) is an oral, potent, irreversible EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor selective for EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor sensitising mutations, and the EGFR Thr790Met resistance mutation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of osimertinib in patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who had progressed after previous therapy with an approved EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. In this phase 2, open-label, single-arm study (AURA2), patients aged at least 18 years with centrally confirmed EGFR Thr790Met-positive mutations, locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC who progressed on previous EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor therapy received osimertinib 80 mg orally once daily; treatment could continue beyond progression if the investigator observed a clinical benefit. Patients with asymptomatic, stable CNS metastases not requiring steroids were allowed to enrol. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response by blinded independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Response endpoints were assessed in the evaluable for response analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of osimertinib and had measurable disease at baseline according to blinded independent central review). Other endpoints and safety were assessed in all patients receiving at least one osimertinib dose (full analysis set). The study is ongoing and patients are still receiving treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02094261. Between May 20, 2014, and Sept 12, 2014, 472 patients were screened, of whom 210 started osimertinib treatment between June 13, 2014, and Oct 27, 2014; 11 patients were excluded from the evaluable for response analysis set (n=199) due to absence of measurable disease at baseline by blinded independent central review. At data cutoff (Nov 1, 2015), 122 (58%) patients remained on treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 13·0 months (IQR 7·6–14·2). 140 (70%; 95% CI 64–77) of 199 patients achieved an objective response by blinded independent central review: confirmed complete responses were achieved in six (3%) patients and partial responses were achieved in 134 (67%) patients. The most common all-causality grade 3 and 4 adverse events were pulmonary embolism (seven [3%]), prolonged electrocardiogram QT (five [2%]), decreased neutrophil count (four [2%]), anaemia, dyspnoea, hyponatraemia, increased alanine aminotransferase, and thrombocytopenia (three [1%] each). Serious adverse events were reported in 52 (25%) patients, of which 11 (5%) were investigator assessed as possibly treatment-related to osimertinib. Seven deaths were due to adverse events; these were pneumonia (n=2), pneumonia aspiration (n=1), rectal haemorrhage (n=1), dyspnoea (n=1), failure to thrive (n=1), and interstitial lung disease (n=1). The only fatal event assessed as possibly treatment-related by the investigator was due to interstitial lung disease. Osimertinib showed clinical activity with manageable side-effects in patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive NSCLC. Therefore, osimertinib could be a suitable treatment for patients with EGFR Thr790Met-positive disease who have progressed on an EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. AstraZeneca.

Resistance to first-generation or second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy develops in almost half of patients with EGFR-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after 1 year of treatment. The JO25567 phase 2 trial comparing erlotinib plus bevacizumab combination therapy with erlotinib monotherapy established the activity and manageable toxicity of erlotinib plus bevacizumab in patients with NSCLC. We did a phase 3 trial to validate the results of the JO25567 study and report here the results from the preplanned interim analysis. In this prespecified interim analysis of the randomised, open-label, phase 3 NEJ026 trial, we recruited patients with stage IIIB–IV disease or recurrent, cytologically or histologically confirmed non-squamous NSCLC with activating EGFR genomic aberrations from 69 centres across Japan. Eligible patients were at least 20 years old, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower, no previous chemotherapy for advanced disease, and one or more measurable lesions based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (1.1). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral erlotinib 150 mg per day plus intravenous bevacizumab 15 mg/kg once every 21 days, or erlotinib 150 mg per day monotherapy. Randomisation was done by minimisation, stratified by sex, smoking status, clinical stage, and EGFR mutation subtype. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. This study is ongoing; the data cutoff for this prespecified interim analysis was Sept 21, 2017. Efficacy was analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of treatment and had at least one response evaluation. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The trial is registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry, number UMIN000017069. Between June 3, 2015, and Aug 31, 2016, 228 patients were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib plus bevacizumab (n=114) or erlotinib alone (n=114). 112 patients in each group were evaluable for efficacy, and safety was evaluated in 112 patients in the combination therapy group and 114 in the monotherapy group. Median follow-up was 12·4 months (IQR 7·0–15·7). At the time of interim analysis, median progression-free survival for patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group was 16·9 months (95% CI 14·2–21·0) compared with 13·3 months (11·1–15·3) for patients in the erlotinib group (hazard ratio 0·605, 95% CI 0·417–0·877; p=0·016). 98 (88%) of 112 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group and 53 (46%) of 114 patients in the erlotinib alone group had grade 3 or worse adverse events. The most common grade 3–4 adverse event was rash (23 [21%] of 112 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group vs 24 [21%] of 114 patients in the erlotinib alone group). Nine (8%) of 112 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group and five (4%) of 114 patients in the erlotinib alone group had serious adverse events. The most common serious adverse events were grade 4 neutropenia (two [2%] of 112 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group) and grade 4 hepatic dysfunction (one [1%] of 112 patients in the erlotinib plus bevacizumab group and one [1%] of 114 patients in the erlotinib alone group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. The results of this interim analysis showed that bevacizumab plus erlotinib combination therapy improves progression-free survival compared with erlotinib alone in patients with EGFR-positive NSCLC. Future studies with longer follow-up, and overall survival and quality-of-life data will be required to further assess the efficacy of this combination in this setting. Chugai Pharmaceutical.

Among patients with EGFR -mutated lung cancer after chemoradiotherapy, 65% of patients who received osimertinib were alive without progression at 2 years, as compared with 13% of those who received placebo.

Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study. The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597. Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7–26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30–49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations. Janssen Research & Development.

In a randomized trial involving patients with non–small-cell lung cancer with mutant EGFR (T790M) in whom a tyrosine kinase inhibitor had failed, osimertinib was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than platinum therapy plus pemetrexed. Among patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer with a mutant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the standard first-line therapy. 1 – 4 Despite high tumor response rates with first-line EGFR-TKIs, disease progresses in a majority of patients after 9 to 13 months of treatment. 5 – 12 At the time of progression, approximately 60% of patients (regardless of race or ethnic background) are found to have a p.Thr790Met point mutation (T790M) in the gene encoding EGFR. 13 – 16 The presence of the T790M variant reduces binding of first-generation or second-generation EGFR-TKIs to the ATP-binding pocket of EGFR, thereby reducing . . .

Patients with non–small-cell lung cancer and mutated epidermal growth factor receptors who develop resistance to EGFR inhibitors through a particular mutation (T790M) are responsive to rociletinib. Increasingly, treatment decisions for patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are based on the driver mutation rather than the histologic subtype, when such mutations are present. Mutations in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) are among the most common oncogenic mutations in lung adenocarcinoma and are present in approximately 10 to 15% of Western patients and 30 to 35% of Asian patients. 1 At the time of diagnosis, approximately 90% of EGFR -mutation–positive patients have one of two activating mutations, an in-frame deletion in exon 19 or an L858R point mutation in exon 21. 1 The first-generation and . . .

EGFR overexpression occurs in 27–55% of oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas, and correlates with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess addition of the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab to epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOC) in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. In this randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (REAL3), we enrolled patients with untreated, metastatic, or locally advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma at 63 centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals) in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of open-label EOC (epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 per day on days 1–21) or modified-dose EOC plus panitumumab (mEOC+P; epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1–21, and panitumumab 9 mg/kg on day 1). Randomisation was blocked and stratified for centre region, extent of disease, and performance status. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. After a preplanned independent data monitoring committee review in October, 2011, trial recruitment was halted and panitumumab withdrawn. Data for patients on treatment were censored at this timepoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00824785. Between June 2, 2008, and Oct 17, 2011, we enrolled 553 eligible patients. Median overall survival in 275 patients allocated EOC was 11·3 months (95% CI 9·6–13·0) compared with 8·8 months (7·7–9·8) in 278 patients allocated mEOC+P (hazard ratio [HR] 1·37, 95% CI 1·07–1·76; p=0·013). mEOC+P was associated with increased incidence of grade 3–4 diarrhoea (48 [17%] of 276 patients allocated mEOC+P vs 29 [11%] of 266 patients allocated EOC), rash (29 [11%] vs two [1%]), mucositis (14 [5%] vs none), and hypomagnesaemia (13 [5%] vs none) but reduced incidence of haematological toxicity (grade ≥3 neutropenia 35 [13%] vs 74 [28%]). Addition of panitumumab to EOC chemotherapy does not increase overall survival and cannot be recommended for use in an unselected population with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Amgen, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.