Combination therapy with gefitinib and rofecoxib in patients with platinum-pretreated relapsed non-small-cell lung cancer

Purpose: In non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) play major roles in tumorigenesis. This phase I/II study evaluated combined therapy with the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) gefitinib and the COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib in platinum-pretreated, relapsed, metastatic NSCLC (n = 45). Patients and Methods: Gefitinib 250 mg/d was combined with rofecoxib (dose escalated from 12.5 to 25 to 50 mg/d through three cohorts, each n = 6). Because the rofecoxib maximum-tolerated dose was not reached, the 50 mg/d cohort was expanded for efficacy evaluation (n = 33). Results: Among the 42 assessable patients, there was one complete response (CR) and two partial responses (PRs) and 12 patients with stable disease (SD); disease control rate was 35.7% (95% CI, 21.6% to 52.0%). Median time to tumor progression was 55 days (95% CI, 47 to 70 days), and median survival was 144 days (95% CI, 103 to 190 days). In a pilot study, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) proteomics analysis of baseline serum samples could distinguish patients with an objective response from those with SD or progressive disease (PD), and those with disease control (CR, PR, and SD) from those with PD. The regimen was generally well tolerated, with predictable toxicities including skin rash and diarrhea. Conclusion: Gefitinib combined with rofecoxib provided disease control equivalent to that expected with single-agent gefitinib and was generally well tolerated. Baseline serum proteomics may help identify those patients most likely to benefit from EGFR TKIs. © 2007 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6–12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1–11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57–0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9–15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1–13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58–0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.

Current status of pharmacogenomics testing for anti-tumor drug therapies : approaches to non-melanoma skin cancer

Skin cancer is one of the most commonly occurring cancer types, with substantial social, physical, and financial burdens on both individuals and societies. Although the role of UV light in initiating skin cancer development has been well characterized, genetic studies continue to show that predisposing factors can influence an individual's susceptibility to skin cancer and response to treatment. In the future, it is hoped that genetic profiles, comprising a number of genetic markers collectively involved in skin cancer susceptibility and response to treatment or prognosis, will aid in more accurately informing practitioners' choices of treatment. Individualized treatment based on these profiles has the potential to increase the efficacy of treatments, saving both time and money for the patient by avoiding the need for extensive or repeated treatment. Increased treatment responses may in turn prevent recurrence of skin cancers, reducing the burden of this disease on society. Currently existing pharmacogenomic tests, such as those that assess variation in the metabolism of the anticancer drug fluorouracil, have the potential to reduce the toxic effects of anti-tumor drugs used in the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) by determining individualized appropriate dosage. If the savings generated by reducing adverse events negate the costs of developing these tests, pharmacogenomic testing may increasingly inform personalized NMSC treatment.

Bone matters in lung cancer

Background: Bone metastases are a significant and undertreated clinical problem in patients with advanced lung cancer. Design: We reviewed the incidence of bone metastases and skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with lung cancer and examined the burden on patients' lives and on health care systems. Available therapies to improve survival and lessen the impact of SREs on quality of life (QoL) were also investigated. Results: Bone metastases are common in lung cancer; however, owing to short survival times, data on the incidences of SREs are limited. As with other cancers, the costs associated with treating SREs in lung cancer are substantial. Bisphosphonates reduce the frequency of SREs and improve measures of pain and QoL in patients with lung cancer; however, nephrotoxicity is a common complication of therapy. Denosumab, a recently approved bone-targeted therapy, is superior to zoledronic acid in increasing the time to first on-study SRE in patients with solid tumours, including lung cancer. Additional roles of bone-targeted therapies beyond the prevention of SREs are under investigation. Conclusions: With increasing awareness of the consequences of SREs, bone-targeted therapies may play a greater role in the management of patients with lung cancer, with the aim of delaying disease progression and preserving QoL. © The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

Receptor tyrosine kinases and their activation in melanoma

Receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) and their downstream signalling pathways have long been hypothesized to play key roles in melanoma development. A decade ago, evidence was derived largely from animal models, RTK expression studies and detection of activated RAS isoforms in a small fraction of melanomas. Predictions that overexpression of specific RTKs implied increased kinase activity and that some RTKs would show activating mutations in melanoma were largely untested. However, technological advances including rapid gene sequencing, siRNA methods and phospho-RTK arrays now give a more complete picture. Mutated forms of RTK genes including KIT, ERBB4, the EPH and FGFR families and others are known in melanoma. Additional over- or underexpressed RTKs and also protein tyrosine phosphatases (PTPs) have been reported, and activities measured. Complex interactions between RTKs and PTPs are implicated in the abnormal signalling driving aberrant growth and survival in malignant melanocytes, and indeed in normal melanocytic signalling including the response to ultraviolet radiation. Kinases are considered druggable targets, so characterization of global RTK activity in melanoma should assist the rational development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for clinical use. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

The role of the molecular footprint of EGFR in tailoring treatment decisions in NSCLC

The majority of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) present with advanced disease, with targeted therapies providing some improvement in clinical outcomes. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase (TK) plays an important role in the pathogenesis of NSCLC. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), which target the EGFR TK domain, have proven to be an effective treatment strategy; however, patient responses to treatment vary considerably. Therefore, the identification of patients most likely to respond to treatment is essential to optimise the benefit of TKIs. Tumour-associated activating mutations in EGFR can identify patients with NSCLC who are likely to have a good response to TKIs. Nonetheless, the majority of patients relapse within a year of starting treatment. Studies of tumours at relapse have demonstrated expression of a T790M mutation in exon 20 of the EGFR TK domain in approximately 50% of cases. Although conferring resistance to reversible TKIs, these patients may remain sensitive to new-generation irreversible/panerb inhibitors. A number of techniques have been employed for genotypic assessment of tumourassociated DNA to identify EGFR mutations, each of which has advantages and disadvantages. This review presents an overview of the current methodologies used to identify such molecular markers. Recent developments in technology may make the monitoring of changes in patients' tumour genotypes easier in clinical practice, which may enable patients' treatment regimens to be tailored during the course of their disease, potentially leading to improved patient outcomes.

Epidermal growth factor receptors and cyclooxygenase-2 in the pathogenesis of non-small cell lung cancer : potential targets for chemoprevention and systemic therapy

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is part of a family of plasma membrane receptor tyrosine kinases that control many important cellular functions, from growth and proliferation to cell death. Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 is an enzyme which catalyses the conversion of arachidonic acid to prostagladins and thromboxane. It is induced by various inflammatory stimuli, including the pro-inflammatory cytokines, Interleukin (IL)-1β, Tumour Necrosis Factor (TNF)-α and IL-2. Both EGFR and COX-2 are over-expressed in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and have been implicated in the early stages of tumourigenesis. This paper considers their roles in the development and progression of lung cancer, their potential interactions, and reviews the recent progress in cancer therapies that are directed toward these targets. An increasing body of evidence suggests that selective inhibitors of both EGFR and COX-2 are potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of NSCLC, in the adjuvant, metastatic and chemopreventative settings. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Management of endocrine resistant breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may present de novo but more commonly develops in women initially presenting with early breast cancer despite the widespread use of adjuvant hormonal and cytotoxic chemotherapy. MBC is incurable. Hormone sensitive MBC eventually becomes resistant to endocrine therapy in most women. Anthracyclines are the agents of choice in the treatment of endocrine resistant MBC. With the widespread use of anthracyclines in the adjuvant setting, taxanes have become the agents of choice for many patients. Recently capecitabine has become established as a standard of care for patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. However, a range of agents have activity as third line treatment. These include gemcitabine, vinorelbine and platinum analogues. The sequential use of non-cross resistant single agents rather than combination therapy is preferable in most women with MBC. Even though combination therapy can improve response rates and increase progression free interval, there is no robust evidence to indicate an advantage in terms of overall survival. Moreover, combination therapy is associated with a higher toxicity rate and poor quality of life. There is no role for dose-intense therapy, high dose therapy or maintenance chemotherapy outside the context of a clinical trial. The introduction of trastuzumab, monoclonal antibody targeting growth factor receptors, has improved the therapeutic options for women with tumours overexpressing HER2/neu. DNA micro-array profiles of tumours can potentially help to individualise therapy in future. Molecular targeted therapy has the potential to revolutionise the management of MBC.

Interactions between hypoxia and epidermal growth factor receptor in non-small-cell-lung cancer

Tumor hypoxia has been recognized to confer resistance to anticancer therapy since the early 20th century. More recently, its fundamental role in tumorigenesis has been established. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1 has been identified as an important transcription factor that mediates the cellular response to hypoxia, promoting both cellular survival and apoptosis under different conditions. Increased tumor cell expression of this transcription factor promotes tumor growth In vivo and is associated with a worse prognosis in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing tumor resection. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) promotes tumor cell proliferation and anglogenesis and inhibits apoptosis. Epidermal growth factor receptor expression increases in a stepwise manner during tumorigenesis and is overexpressed in > 50% of NSCLC tumors. This review discusses the reciprocal relationship between tumor cell hypoxia and EGFR. Recent studies suggest that hypoxia induces expression of EGFR and its ligands. In return, EGFR might enhance the cellular response to hypoxia by increasing expression of HIF-1α, and so act as a survival factor for hypoxic cancer cells. Immunohistochemical studies on a series of resected NSCLC tumors add weight to this contention by demonstrating a close association between expression of EGFR, HIF-1α, and:1 of HIF-1's target proteins, carbonic anhydrase IX. In this article we discuss emerging treatment strategies for NSCLC that target HIF-1, HIF-1 transcriptional targets, and EGFR.

Genome stability pathways in head and neck cancers

Genomic instability underlies the transformation of host cells toward malignancy, promotes development of invasion and metastasis and shapes the response of established cancer to treatment. In this review, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of genomic stability in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC), with an emphasis on DNA repair pathways. HNSCC is characterized by distinct profiles in genome stability between similarly staged cancers that are reflected in risk, treatment response and outcomes. Defective DNA repair generates chromosomal derangement that can cause subsequent alterations in gene expression, and is a hallmark of progression toward carcinoma. Variable functionality of an increasing spectrum of repair gene polymorphisms is associated with increased cancer risk, while aetiological factors such as human papillomavirus, tobacco and alcohol induce significantly different behaviour in induced malignancy, underpinned by differences in genomic stability. Targeted inhibition of signalling receptors has proven to be a clinically-validated therapy, and protein expression of other DNA repair and signalling molecules associated with cancer behaviour could potentially provide a more refined clinical model for prognosis and treatment prediction. Development and expansion of current genomic stability models is furthering our understanding of HNSCC pathophysiology and uncovering new, promising treatment strategies. © 2013 Glenn Jenkins et al.

2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer : non-small-cell lung cancer first-line/second and further lines in advanced disease

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines in advanced disease, early stage disease and locally-advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on 1st line / 2nd and further lines of treatment in advanced disease. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Dacomitinib versus erlotinib in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Pooled subset analyses from two randomized trials

Background: The irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in NSCLC patients with activating EGFR mutations, but it is unknown if they are superior to the reversible inhibitors. Dacomitinib is an oral, small-molecule irreversible inhibitor of all enzymatically active HER family tyrosine kinases. Methods: The ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067) studies randomized patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC following progression with one or two prior chemotherapy regimens to dacomitinib or erlotinib. EGFR mutation testing was performed centrally on archived tumor samples. We pooled patients with exon 19 deletion and L858R EGFR mutations from both studies to compare the efficacy of dacomitinib to erlotinib. Results: One hundred twenty-one patients with any EGFR mutation were enrolled; 101 had activating mutations in exon 19 or 21. For patients with exon19/21 mutations, the median progression-free survival was 14.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0–18.2] with dacomitinib and 9.6 months (95% CI 7.4–12.7) with erlotinib [unstratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.717 (95% CI 0.458–1.124), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.146]. The median survival was 26.6 months (95% CI 21.6–41.5) with dacomitinib versus 23.2 months (95% CI 16.0–31.8) with erlotinib [unstratified HR 0.737 (95% CI 0.431–1.259), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.265]. Dacomitinib was associated with a higher incidence of diarrhea and mucositis in both studies compared with erlotinib. Conclusions: Dacomitinib is an active agent with comparable efficacy to erlotinib in the EGFR mutated patients. The subgroup with exon 19 deletion had favorable outcomes with dacomitinib. An ongoing phase III study will compare dacomitinib to gefitinib in first-line therapy of patients with NSCLC harboring common activating EGFR mutations (ARCHER 1050; NCT01774721). Clinical trials number: ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067).