Molecular Targeted Agents for Stage III...
Transcript of Molecular Targeted Agents for Stage III...
Molecular Targeted Agents for Stage III NSCLC
Bilal Piperdi, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine
Director, Thoracic Medical Oncology Program
Montefiore Einstein Center for Cancer Care
Bronx, NY 10461
Case
• 69 y old AA female, former smoker with
2 months history of persistent cough
• PET/CT showed left lung mass, hilar
LN and mildly enlarged subcarinal LN.
No evidence of distant metastasis
• ECOG PS: 1
• Brain MRI: negative.
• PFTs : excellent
• The patient underwent mediastinoscopy
• Path: 2/3 left level 4 LN positive for
poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma
Your recommendation for treatment ?
A. Concurrent chemoRT with 60 Gy RT and two cycles of
cisplatin and etoposide
B. Concurrent chemoRT with 60 Gy RT and weekly
carboplatin/paclitaxel followed by two cycles of carboplatin and
paclitaxel
C. ChemoRT up to 45 Gy followed by surgery
D. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 3 cycles of platinum doublet
followed by surgery
E. Surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy.
The patient tested positive for exon 19 deletion in EGFR. Your recommendation for treatment ?
A. My treatment recommendation will not change
B. Concurrent chemoRT followed by EGFR-TKI for 1 year
C. EGFR TKI alone
D. EGFR TKI followed by chemoRT
E. EGFR TKI followed by surgery
F. A clinical trial if available
Stage III NSCLC
• Locally advanced disease
• Requires combined modality approach
• Median survival: 14-22 months
• 5 yr survival: 19-24% (IIIA) and 5-10% (IIIB)
• Stage III A : – T1a,b T2a,b N2 M0
– T3 N1 or N2
– T4 N0 or N1
• Stage III B : – T4 N2
– Any T N3
Stage III NSCLC
Resectable
Non-resectable
Practical Classification of stage III disease
Resectability depends on location of tumor and patient’s
characteristics (age, comorbidities, PFT etc..)
Menu for treatment for stage III disease
Surgery Chemotherapy
Radiation Targeted
Therapies
Local Systemic
Definitive Concurrent chemoRT
Neoadjuvant chemotx
Neoadjuvant chemoRT
Surgery
Surgery
Surgery
Adjuvant chemotx.
Treatment paradigms in stage III NSCLC
Outcomes from clinical trials
• EGFRTKI after chemoRT no benefit in unselected patients (SWOG 0023)
• Adding Cetuximab to chemoRT did not improve survival (RTOG 9410; CALGB 30407)
• Platium doublets as neoadj tx.
• Concurrent ChemoRT better than sequential chemo.
• No benefit from additional chemo before (CALGB 39801) or after chemoRT (HOG)
• Surgery not better than RT after neoadj chemo (EORTC)
• Survival same for definitive chemoRT vs chemoRT+S (INT 0139)
• Best outcome in patient with mediastinal downstaging
• Concurrent ChemoRT prolongs survival over sequential (RTOG 9410)
• No added benefit from RT or chemoRT after neoadj chemo (GLCCG; SAKK)
• More is not better ; 60 vs 74Gy (RTOG 0617)
Radiation Surgery
Targeted Therapy
Chemotherapy
Outcomes from clinical trials in stage III NSCLC
• RTOG 9410: chemo (cis+novel/RT) median OS 17 m;
21% 4 yr survival
• Intergroup 0139: 5yr PFS surgery 22% vs chemo/RT
11%; OS: 27 vs 20%
• HOG trial: ChemoRT+taxotere vs chemoRT: PFS 12
and 12.9 m ; OS 21.5m and 24.5m
INT 0139 trial
• Patients with N2 disease were treated with chemoRT
and then randomized to surgery or further chemoRT
• In the surgical group, the best outcome was seen in
patients who has N0 disese after neoadjuvant
therapy
• The 5yr survival rates are anyTN0 : 41%; anyTN1-3:
24% and no surgery: 8%
Targeted Agents in Stage III NSCLC
• MAbs
– Bevacizumab
– Cetuximab
• TKI
– Gefitinib
– Erlotinib
• Immunotherapy
– L-BLP25
• Failed Agents
– Thalidomide (ECOG
3598)
– AE 941 (Shark
Cartilage)
– Bortezomib
– Doranidazole
(radiosensitizer)
Bevacizumab
• Phase I/II study ( Socinski et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Nov 10;30(32):3953-9)
– In combination with concurrent chemoRT
– High rate of pulmonary hemorrhage in squamous
– Tracehoesophageal fistula and other toxicities
– Use with chemoRT strongly discouraged outside the setting
of properly designed clinical trial
• E1505
– Chemo +/- bev in resected NSCLC
– Includes a good subset of resected stage IIIA patients.
Cetuximab
• N0422 trial
– Phase II trial; n=57; age >65; PS=2
– Cetuximab +RT (60Gy)
– TTP: 7.2 m; median OS 15.1 m
• RTOG 0324 trial
– Phase II trial; n=87
– Cetuximab with carbo/Taxol and RT (63 Gy) followed by
consolidation chemotx
– RR: 62%; median OS 22.7 months
CALGB 30407
Pem/Carbo +/- cetuximab with RT
Govindan R et al. JCO 2011;29:3120-3125
©2011 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
EGFR-TKI in unselected patients
SWOG 0023
SWOG 0023
Kelly K et al. JCO 2008;26:2450-2456
©2008 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
Failed trial designs for targeted therapies
• No prior selection by molecular markers
• Adding to chemoRT
• Increase toxicity; No synergy or too synergistic and toxic; best strategy?
• As maintenance tx after chemoRT
• Very heterogeneous group
• The patients are usually beat out after chemoRT
Better trial designs for targeted therapies
• Selection by molecular markers
• Give the drug with best response in stage IV disease upfront
• Question the best local therapy
NO MUTATION DETECTED
EML4-ALK7%
DOUBLE MUTANTS 3%
BRAF 2%
PIK3CA
HER2
MET AMP
MEK1
NRAS
AKT1
KRAS22%
EGFR17%
Mutation found in 54% (280/516) of
tumors completely tested (CI, 50%-59%)
Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium
Incidence of Single Driver Mutations
in Adenocarcinoma of the Lung
Kris MG et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011(suppl);29. Abstract CRA7506. 32
Riely GJ, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(3 Pt 1):839-844.
Mutations Identified in EGFR Gene
Exons 1–16
Exons 18–24
Exons 25–28
EGFR transcript
Exon 17
Extracellular
domain
Trans-
membrane
domain
Tyrosine-
kinase
domain
Regulatory
domain
Confer sensitivity/resistance to
EGFR TKIs
Unclear effect on
sensitivity to
EGFR TKIs
18
18
19
20
21
Deletions
L858R
G719A/S
L861X
P694X
V700D
E709X
G735S
V738F
V742A
T751I
S752Y
D761N A763V
N765A
S768I
T783A
L792P
L798F
G810S
N826S
L838V
T847I
I853T
A859T
E866K
L833V
H835L
H850N
V851X
G863D
A864T
L730F P733L
E746K
L688P
V689M
I715S
L718P
S720X
D761Y
D770_N771 insNPG
T790M
EGFR
Chro
mosom
e 7
EGFR mutation and EGFR-TKI’s
• Subsets of NSCLC patients with activating mutations in EGFR kinase domian (deletion in exon 19 and L858R point mutation in exon 21) are exquisitely sensitive to EGFR-TKI including erlotinib and afatinib
• 15-20% of adenocarcinoma in Western patient population have EGFR mutation Rosell et al NEJM
• Similar incidence in early stage (I-IIIA) (20%) versus late stage (IIIB/IV) 27% D’Angelo et al JCO May 20 2011
EURTAC: Objective Response Rate
35
65%
16%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Ob
jec
tive
Re
sp
on
se
Ra
te, %
ORR in the EURTAC Intent-to-Treat Population
Erlotinib
(n=86)
Chemotherapy
(n=88)
Tarceva® (erlotinib) [package insert]. Farmingdale, NY: OSI Pharmaceuticals, LLC, an affiliate of Astellas Pharma US, Inc; 2013.
• The objective response rate was 65% (95% CI, 54.1%-75.1%) for patients treated with erlotinib
tablets and 16% (95% CI, 9.0%-25.3%) for patients treated with chemotherapy
ALK Rearrangement in Cancer
1. Mossé YP et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:5609-5614.
2. Chiane R et al. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008;8:11-24. 36
Or
Inversion
Translocation
ALK-positive cancers: • NSCLC: EML4-ALK, KIF5B-ALK, TFG-ALK
(3%-5%)1
• Anaplastic large cell lymphoma: NPM-ALK1
• Inflammatory myo-fibroblastic tumor: TPM3-
ALK, TPM4-ALK2
• Other solid tumors2
Tumor Responses to Crizotinib for
Patients With ALK-Positive NSCLC
*Partial response patients with 100% change have nontarget disease present.
Kwak EL et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1693-1703. Copyright © 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society.
All rights reserved. 37
Progressive disease
Stable disease
Confirmed partial response
Confirmed complete response
Ma
xim
um
Ch
an
ge
in
Tu
mo
r S
ize
(%
)
-30%
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
RTOG 1308/A 31101 study
Screen patients with Stage III
NSCLC for EGFR mutation and
EML4-alk fusion
EGFR mutated tumors
Arm 1:
Erlotinib for 12 wks followed by chemoRT
Arm 2:
ChemoRT
EML4-alk fusion positive tumors
Arm 3:
Crizotinib for 12 wks followed by
chemoRT
Arm 4:
Chemo RT
Concurrent chemoradiation:
64 Gy thoracic RT with either cisplatin-etoposide or carboplatin-paclitaxel
EVENT trial EValuation of Erlotinib as a Neoadjuvant
Therapy in stage III NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations (EVENT trial)
Multi-institutional pilot phase II study
Stage III NSCLC; EGFR mutation positive
Stage III NSCLC (N2 node confirmed by mediastinoscopy or EUS)
PET/CT and MRI brain negative
EGFR mutation testing
EGFR mutation positive
Erlotinib 150mg PO daily for 2 months
Re-staging by PET/CT +/- mediastinal restaging (*) and evaluation for surgery
Surgically resectable
surgery
Chemotherapy +/- radiation (at investigator’s discretion)
Unresectable
Chemotherapy +/- RT or erlotinib
(at investigator’s discretion)
Progressive disease
Chemotherapy +/- RT (at investigator’s discretion)
EGFR mutation negative
* Patient with non-progressive disease who are not going for
surgery should have mediastinal restaging done by either
EUS/EBUS or mediastinoscopy
Objectives
• Primary
– To estimate the rate of mediastinal downstaging (N0 disease
in final pathology) after neoadjuvant erlotinib in patients with
EGFR mutated stage III NSCLC
– To estimate the complete pathological response rate after
neoadjuvant erlotinib in patients with EGFR mutated stage III
NSCLC
Statistics
• The primary objective is to estimate the rate of mediastinal downstaging (path N0 disease) after neoadjuvant erlotinib
• Based on neoadj chemo trials, the path N0 rate of 30% or higher will justify the further study of neoadjuvant erlotinib and the rate of 15% or less will be considered ineffective.
• An optimal two-stage phase II study
• Nineteen (19) patients will be accrued in the first stage of phase II. If 3 or fewer responses are observed during the first stage then the treatment will be concluded early for lack of efficacy. Otherwise, 36 additional patients will be accrued for the second stage. If 12 or fewer responses among 55 patients are observed by the end of this phase II study, no further investigation of this treatment regimen iswarranted.
• The power under this design is 80% and the type I error is 0.05. The probability of early stopping at the first stage is 68.4% if the true response rate is 15%. If the true response rate is 30%, the probability of early stopping at the first stage is 13.3%.
National Cancer Center Korea: phase II
Stage III NSCLC Stratified by
EGFR mutation
Arm 1:
Erlotinib X 3 cycles -> CCRT with Erlotinib (-> continue Erlotinib
(X 6 cycles)
Arm 2: Erlotinib X 3 cycles -> CCRT
with IP -> recurrence ->
Erlotinib (until PD)
Arm 3 IP X 3 cycles -> CCRT with IP (X
2 cycles)
Arm 4 : CCRT with IP (X 2 cycles) ->
consolidation IP (X 3 cycles)
Irinotecan 65mg/m2 + Cisplatin 30mg/m2 IV on D1,D8 every 3 weeks X 3 cycles
Drug: CCRT with IP chemotherapy Irinotecan (60mg/m2) + cisplatin (30mg/m2) IV on D1 & 8 every 3 weeks X 2 cycles
Radiation: CCRT CCRT :Concurrent Thoracic Radiotherapy (2.4 Gy/fr, Total 60 Gy, 25fr over 5 weeks)
Conclusion
• Progress is needed in treatment of stage III NSCLC
• We have reached a plateau with concurrent
chemoRT
• More novel trial designs with better patient selection
for targeted therapy is needed
• Signals from immunotherapy trial needs confirmation