Icotinib versus chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for stage II-IIIA EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (EVIDENCE): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

Icotinib has provided survival benefits for patients with advanced, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare icotinib with chemotherapy in patients with EGFR-mutant stage II-IIIA NSCLC after complete tumour resection. Here, we report the results from the preplanned interim analysis of the study. In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 29 hospitals in China, eligible patients were aged 18-70 years, had histopathogically confirmed stage II-IIIA NSCLC, had complete resection up to 8 weeks before random assignment, were treatment-naive, and had confirmed activation mutation in exon 19 or exon 21 of the EGFR gene. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive web-based response system to receive either oral icotinib 125 mg thrice daily for 2 years or four 21-day cycles of intravenous chemotherapy (vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of each cycle plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle for adenocarcinoma or squamous carcinoma; or pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks for non-squamous carcinoma). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival assessed in the full analysis set. Secondary endpoints were overall survival assessed in the full analysis set and safety assessed in all participants who received study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02448797. Between June 8, 2015, and August 2, 2019, 322 patients were randomly assigned to icotinib (n=161) or chemotherapy (n=161); the full analysis set included 151 patients in the icotinib group and 132 in the chemotherapy group. Median follow-up in the full analysis set was 24·9 months (IQR 16·6-36·4). 40 (26%) of 151 patients in the icotinib group and 58 (44%) of 132 patients in the chemotherapy group had disease relapse or death. Median disease-free survival was 47·0 months (95% CI 36·4-not reached) in the icotinib group and 22·1 months (16·8-30·4) in the chemotherapy group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·36 [95% CI 0·24-0·55]; p<0·0001). 3-year disease-free survival was 63·9% (95% CI 51·8-73·7) in the icotinib group and 32·5% (21·3-44·2) in the chemotherapy group. Overall survival data are immature with 14 (9%) deaths in the icotinib group and 14 (11%) deaths in the chemotherapy. The HR for overall survival was 0·91 (95% CI 0·42-1·94) in the full analysis set. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in two (1%) of 156 patients in the icotinib group and 19 (14%) of 139 patients in the chemotherapy group. No interstitial pneumonia or treatment-related death was observed in either group. Our results suggest that compared with chemotherapy, icotinib significantly improves disease-free survival and has a better tolerability profile in patients with EGFR-mutant stage II-IIIA NSCLC after complete tumour resection. Betta Pharmaceuticals TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

He J ，Su C ，Liang W ，Xu S ，Wu L ，Fu X ，Zhang X ，Ge D ，Chen Q ，Mao W ，Xu L ，Chen C ，Hu B ，Shao G ，Hu J ，Zhao J ，Liu X ，Liu Z ，Wang Z ，Xiao Z ，Gong T ，Lin W ，Li X ，Ye F ，Liu Y ，Ma H ，Huang Y ，Zhou J ，Wang Z ，Fu J ，Ding L ，Mao L ，Zhou C ... -  《-》

Icotinib versus whole-brain irradiation in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and multiple brain metastases (BRAIN): a multicentre, phase 3, open-label, parallel, randomised controlled trial.

For patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and multiple brain metastases, whole-brain irradiation (WBI) is a standard-of-care treatment, but its effects on neurocognition are complex and concerning. We compared the efficacy of an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), icotinib, versus WBI with or without chemotherapy in a phase 3 trial of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and multiple brain metastases. We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel randomised controlled trial (BRAIN) at 17 hospitals in China. Eligible participants were patients with NSCLC with EGFR mutations, who were naive to treatment with EGFR-TKIs or radiotherapy, and had at least three metastatic brain lesions. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either icotinib 125 mg orally (three times per day) or WBI (30 Gy in ten fractions of 3 Gy) plus concurrent or sequential chemotherapy for 4-6 cycles, until unacceptable adverse events or intracranial disease progression occurred. The randomisation was done by the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group with a web-based allocation system applying the Pocock and Simon minimisation method; groups were stratified by EGFR gene mutation status, treatment line (first line or second line), brain metastases only versus both intracranial and extracranial metastases, and presence or absence of symptoms of intracranial hypertension. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment assignment, but individuals involved in the data analysis did not participate in the treatments and were thus masked to allocation. Patients receiving icotinib who had intracranial progression only were switched to WBI plus either icotinib or chemotherapy until further progression; those receiving icotinib who had extracranial progression only were switched to icotinib plus chemotherapy. Patients receiving WBI who progressed were switched to icotinib until further progression. Icotinib could be continued beyond progression if a clinical benefit was observed by the investigators (eg, an improvement in cognition or intracranial pressure). The primary endpoint was intracranial progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from randomisation to either intracranial disease progression or death from any cause. We assessed efficacy and safety in the intention-to-treat population (all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment), hypothesising that intracranial PFS would be 40% longer (hazard ratio [HR] 0·60) with icotinib compared with WBI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01724801. Between Dec 10, 2012, and June 30, 2015, we assigned 176 participants to treatment: 85 to icotinib and 91 to WBI. 18 withdrew from the WBI group before treatment, leaving 73 for assessment. Median follow-up was 16·5 months (IQR 11·5-21·5). Median intracranial PFS was 10·0 months (95% CI 5·6-14·4) with icotinib versus 4·8 months (2·4-7·2) with WBI (equating to a 44% risk reduction with icotinib for an event of intracranial disease progression or death; HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·36-0·90; p=0·014). Adverse events of grade 3 or worse were reported in seven (8%) of 85 patients in the icotinib group and 28 (38%) of 73 patients in the WBI group. Raised concentrations of alanine aminotransferase and rash were the most common adverse events of any grade in both groups, occurring in around 20-30% of each group. At the time of final analysis, 42 (49%) patients in the icotinib group and 37 (51%) in the WBI group had died. 78 of these patients died from disease progression, and one patient in the WBI group died from thrombogenesis related to chemotherapy. In patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and multiple brain metastases, icotinib was associated with significantly longer intracranial PFS than WBI plus chemotherapy, indicating that icotinib might be a better first-line therapeutic option for this patient population. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Lung Cancer Translational Medicine, National Health and Family Planning Commission of China, Guangzhou Science and Technology Bureau, Betta Pharmaceuticals, and the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group.

Yang JJ ，Zhou C ，Huang Y ，Feng J ，Lu S ，Song Y ，Huang C ，Wu G ，Zhang L ，Cheng Y ，Hu C ，Chen G ，Zhang L ，Liu X ，Yan HH ，Tan FL ，Zhong W ，Wu YL ... -  《-》

Gefitinib versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin as adjuvant treatment for stage II-IIIA (N1-N2) EGFR-mutant NSCLC (ADJUVANT/CTONG1104): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study.

Cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care for patients with resected stage II-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). RADIANT and SELECT trial data suggest patients with EGFR-mutant stage IB-IIIA resected NSCLC could benefit from adjuvant EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. We aimed to compare the efficacy of adjuvant gefitinib versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin in patients with completely resected EGFR-mutant stage II-IIIA (N1-N2) NSCLC. We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 27 centres in China. We enrolled patients aged 18-75 years with completely resected (R0), stage II-IIIA (N1-N2), EGFR-mutant (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 Leu858Arg) NSCLC. Patients were stratified by N stage and EGFR mutation status and randomised (1:1) by Pocock and Simon minimisation with a random element to either gefitinib (250 mg once daily) for 24 months or intravenous vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) plus intravenous cisplatin (75 mg/m2 on day 1) every 3 weeks for four cycles. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, which comprised all randomised patients; the safety population included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Enrolment to the study is closed but survival follow-up is ongoing. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01405079. Between Sept 19, 2011, and April 24, 2014, 483 patients were screened and 222 patients were randomised, 111 to gefitinib and 111 to vinorelbine plus cisplatin. Median follow-up was 36·5 months (IQR 23·8-44·8). Median disease-free survival was significantly longer with gefitinib (28·7 months [95% CI 24·9-32·5]) than with vinorelbine plus cisplatin (18·0 months [13·6-22·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·42-0·87; p=0·0054). In the safety population, the most commonly reported grade 3 or worse adverse events in the gefitinib group (n=106) were raised alanine aminotransferase and asparate aminotransferase (two [2%] patients with each event vs none with vinorelbine plus cisplatin). In the vinorelbine plus cisplatin group (n=87), the most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (30 [34%] patients vs none with gefitinib), leucopenia (14 [16%] vs none), and vomiting (eight [9%] vs none). Serious adverse events were reported for seven (7%) patients who received gefitinib and 20 (23%) patients who received vinorelbine plus cisplatin. No interstitial lung disease was noted with gefitinib. No deaths were treatment related. Adjuvant gefitinib led to significantly longer disease-free survival compared with that for vinorelbine plus cisplatin in patients with completely resected stage II-IIIA (N1-N2) EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Based on the superior disease-free survival, reduced toxicity, and improved quality of life, adjuvant gefitinib could be a potential treatment option compared with adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients. However, the duration of benefit with gefitinib after 24 months might be limited and overall survival data are not yet mature. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Lung Cancer Translational Medicine; National Health and Family Planning Commission of People's Republic of China; Guangzhou Science and Technology Bureau; AstraZeneca China.

Zhong WZ ，Wang Q ，Mao WM ，Xu ST ，Wu L ，Shen Y ，Liu YY ，Chen C ，Cheng Y ，Xu L ，Wang J ，Fei K ，Li XF ，Li J ，Huang C ，Liu ZD ，Xu S ，Chen KN ，Xu SD ，Liu LX ，Yu P ，Wang BH ，Ma HT ，Yan HH ，Yang XN ，Zhou Q ，Wu YL ，ADJUVANT investigators ... -  《-》

Erlotinib versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin as adjuvant therapy in Chinese patients with stage IIIA EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EVAN): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after radical resection of stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has quite poor outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether adjuvant erlotinib therapy improves 2-year disease-free survival compared with chemotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive stage IIIA NSCLC. In this randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial, eligible patients aged 18-75 years who had undergone complete (R0) resection of histologically or pathologically confirmed stage IIIA EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and had not received any previous anticancer therapies were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either adjuvant erlotinib (150 mg once daily administered orally) or vinorelbine and cisplatin chemotherapy (four cycles of vinorelbine [25 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle] plus cisplatin [75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day cycle]). Randomisation was done by Simon's minimisation with a random element and was stratified by EGFR activating mutation type (exon 19 vs 21), histology (adenocarcinoma vs non-adenocarcinoma), and smoking status (smoker vs non-smoker). The primary endpoint in the unblinded intention-to-treat analysis was 2-year disease-free survival. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01683175. Between Sept 8, 2012, and May 21, 2015, 102 patients from 16 centres across China were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive erlotinib (n=51) or chemotherapy (n=51). Median follow-up was 33·0 months (IQR 17·8-43·1). 2-year disease-free survival was 81·4% (95% CI 69·6-93·1) in the erlotinib group and 44·6% (26·9-62·4) in the chemotherapy group (relative risk 1·823 [95% CI 1·194-2·784; p=0·0054). The difference in 2-year disease-free survival between the groups was 36·7% (95% CI 15·5-58·0; p=0·0007). Adverse events of any grade occurred in 29 (58%) of 50 patients in the erlotinib group and 28 (65%) of 43 patients in the chemotherapy group. Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in six (12%) of 50 patients in the erlotinib group versus 11 (26%) of 43 in the chemotherapy group; the most common of these in the erlotinib group was rash (in two [4%] of 50 patients) and in the chemotherapy group were decreased neutrophil count (in seven [16%] of 43 patients) and myelosuppression (in four [9%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Adjuvant erlotinib improved 2-year disease-free survival in patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIA NSCLC compared with chemotherapy, with a better tolerability profile. This study suggests that tyrosine kinase inhibitors could have a potentially important role as adjuvant therapy in EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIA NSCLC. However, this trial was a phase 2 study. Mature overall survival data are also needed. Ongoing studies will hopefully confirm the role of adjuvant EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in patients with NSCLC. National Key Research and Development Program of China and Shanghai Roche Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Yue D ，Xu S ，Wang Q ，Li X ，Shen Y ，Zhao H ，Chen C ，Mao W ，Liu W ，Liu J ，Zhang L ，Ma H ，Li Q ，Yang Y ，Liu Y ，Chen H ，Wang C ... -  《-》

Befotertinib (D-0316) versus icotinib as first-line therapy for patients with EGFR-mutated locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 study.

Befotertinib (D-0316) is a novel, selective oral third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. This phase 3 trial compared the efficacy and safety of befotertinib with icotinib as a first-line treatment for patients with EGFR mutation-positive locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study at 39 hospitals in China. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older, had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV unresectable NSCLC, and had confirmed exon 19 deletions or exon 21 Leu858Arg mutation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web response system to receive either oral befotertinib (75-100 mg once daily) or oral icotinib (125 mg three times per day) in 21-day cycles until disease progression or withdrawal criteria were met. Randomisation was stratified by type of EGFR mutation, CNS metastasis status, and gender, and participants, investigators, and data analysts were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival in the full analysis set, which comprised all randomly assigned patients. All patients who received at least one dose of the study drug were included in safety analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04206072, and the overall survival follow-up is still in progress. Between Dec 24, 2019, and Dec 18, 2020, 568 patients were screened, of whom 362 were randomly assigned to the befotertinib (n=182) or icotinib (n=180) group; all 362 patients were included in the full analysis set. Median follow-up was 20·7 months (IQR 10·2-23·5) in the befotertinib group and 19·4 months (10·3-23·5) in the icotinib group. Median IRC-assessed progression-free survival was 22·1 months (95% CI 17·9-not estimable) in the befotertinib group and 13·8 months (12·4-15·2) in the icotinib group (hazard ratio 0·49 [95% CI 0·36-0·68], p<0·0001). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 55 (30%) of 182 patients in the befotertinib group and in 14 (8%) of 180 patients in the icotinib group. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 37 (20%) patients in the befotertinib group and in five (3%) patients in the icotinib group. Two (1%) patients in the befotertinib group and one (1%) patient in the icotinib group died due to treatment-related adverse events. Befotertinib demonstrated superior efficacy compared with icotinib in first-line treatment for patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Although serious adverse events were more common in the befotertinib than the icotinib arm, the safety profile of befotertinib was manageable overall. Betta Pharmaceuticals (China). For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Lu S ，Zhou J ，Jian H ，Wu L ，Cheng Y ，Fan Y ，Fang J ，Chen G ，Zhang Z ，Lv D ，Jiang L ，Wu R ，Jin X ，Zhang X ，Zhang J ，Xie C ，Sun G ，Huang D ，Cui J ，Guo R ，Han Z ，Chen Z ，Liang J ，Zhuang W ，Hu X ，Zang A ，Zhang Y ，Cang S ，Lan Y ，Chen X ，Liu L ，Li X ，Chen J ，Ma R ，Guo Y ，Sun P ，Tian P ，Pan Y ，Liu Z ，Cao P ，Ding L ，Wang Y ，Yuan X ，Wu P ... -  《-》