38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Treatment Outcomes and Safety of Mobocertinib in Platinum-Pretreated Patients With EGFR Exon 20 Insertion–Positive Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer : A Phase 1/2 Open-label Nonrandomized Clinical Trial

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d1143030e518">This nonrandomized clinical trial evaluates the treatment outcomes and safety of mobocertinib treatment in patients with previously treated <i>EGFR</i> exon 20 insertion–positive metastatic non–small cell lung cancer. </p><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-1"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e527">Question</h5> <p id="d1143030e529">Does mobocertinib have activity in patients with <i>EGFR </i>exon 20 insertion ( <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins)–positive metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy? </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-2"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e538">Findings</h5> <p id="d1143030e540">In this nonrandomized clinical trial, mobocertinib showed antitumor activity in patients with platinum-pretreated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC, with a confirmed objective response rate of 28%, median duration of response of 17.5 months, and median progression-free survival of 7.3 months by independent review committee assessments. The safety profile was characterized by gastrointestinal and cutaneous adverse events, which were largely manageable. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-3"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e546">Meaning</h5> <p id="d1143030e548">Mobocertinib has a favorable risk-benefit profile in patients with previously treated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-4"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e556">Importance</h5> <p id="d1143030e558">Metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with <i>EGFR</i> exon 20 insertion ( <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins) mutations is associated with a poor prognosis. Mobocertinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor designed to selectively target <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins mutations. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-5"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e570">Objective</h5> <p id="d1143030e572">To evaluate treatment outcomes and safety of mobocertinib in patients with previously treated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-6"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e578">Design, Setting, and Participants</h5> <p id="d1143030e580">This 3-part, open-label, phase 1/2 nonrandomized clinical trial with dose-escalation/dose-expansion cohorts (28 sites in the US) and a single-arm extension cohort (EXCLAIM; 40 sites in Asia, Europe, and North America) was conducted between June 2016 and November 2020 (data cutoff date). The primary analysis populations were the platinum-pretreated patients (PPP) cohort and the EXCLAIM cohort. The PPP cohort included 114 patients with platinum-pretreated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC who received mobocertinib 160 mg once daily from the dose-escalation (n = 6), dose-expansion (n = 22), and EXCLAIM (n = 86) cohorts. The EXCLAIM cohort included 96 patients with previously treated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC (10 were not platinum pretreated and thus were excluded from the PPP cohort). </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-7"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e589">Interventions</h5> <p id="d1143030e591">Mobocertinib 160 mg once daily.</p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-8"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e594">Main Outcomes and Measures</h5> <p id="d1143030e596">The primary end point of the PPP and EXCLAIM cohorts was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) assessed by independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included confirmed ORR by investigator, duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-9"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e599">Results</h5> <p id="d1143030e601">Among the PPP (n = 114) and EXCLAIM (n = 96) cohorts, the median (range) age was 60 (27-84) and 59 (27-80) years, respectively; most patients were women (75 [66%] and 62 [65%], respectively) and of Asian race (68 [60%] and 66 [69%], respectively). At data cutoff, median follow-up was 14.2 months in the PPP cohort (median 2 prior anticancer regimens; 40 [35%] had baseline brain metastases), with confirmed ORR of 28% (95% CI, 20%-37%) by IRC assessment and 35% (95% CI, 26%-45%) by investigator assessment; median duration of response by IRC assessment was 17.5 months (95% CI, 7.4-20.3). Median progression-free survival by IRC assessment was 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-9.2). Median overall survival was 24.0 months (95% CI, 14.6-28.8). In the EXCLAIM cohort, median follow-up was 13.0 months, with confirmed ORR by IRC assessment of 25% (95% CI, 17%-35%) and by investigator assessment of 32% (95% CI, 23%-43%). The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea and rash. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-10"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e604">Conclusions and Relevance</h5> <p id="d1143030e606">In this open-label, phase 1/2 nonrandomized clinical trial, mobocertinib was associated with clinically meaningful benefit in patients with previously treated <i>EGFR</i>ex20ins-positive mNSCLC, with a manageable safety profile. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="ab-coi210069-11"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d1143030e612">Trial Registration</h5> <p id="d1143030e614">ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: <a data-untrusted="" href="https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02716116" id="d1143030e616" target="xrefwindow">NCT02716116</a> </p> </div>

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

            Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1-mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial.

              Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Oncology
                JAMA Oncol
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2374-2437
                October 14 2021
                : e214761
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Oncology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Shanghai, China
                [2 ]Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
                [3 ]Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
                [4 ]Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
                [5 ]National Taiwan University Cancer Center, Taipei, Taiwan
                [6 ]Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
                [7 ]AdventHealth Orlando, Orlando, Florida
                [8 ]Pacific Shores Medical Group, Long Beach, California
                [9 ]Complejo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña Hospital Teresa Herrera-Materno Infantil, A Coruña, Spain
                [10 ]Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
                [11 ]Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Cambridge, Massachusetts
                [12 ]Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
                Article
                10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4761
                dc35f4c6-ab1a-4308-81d6-692dc2aef6a4
                © 2021
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article