D H Lee1, S-W Kim, C Suh, D H Yoon, E J Yi, J-S Lee. 1. Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, South Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both gefitinib and erlotinib are reversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but they have somewhat different pharmacological properties. We conducted a phase II study of erlotinib after failure of gefitinib treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC who had shown disease progression on gefitinib treatment were treated with erlotinib 150 mg/day until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: Between September 2006 and January 2008, a total of 23 patients were enrolled and all were assessable for response and toxicity. All patients were never smokers and all but one had adenocarcinoma. Of these 23 patients, one had a partial response and one stable disease, resulting in an objective response rate of 4.3% and a disease control rate of 8.7%. These two patients benefited from erlotinib for 6.2 months and 7.8 months, respectively; both had also benefited from prior gefitinib therapy. The most common toxic effects were skin rash and diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Erlotinib should not be given routinely after failure of gefitinib treatment, but can be an option for more highly selected subsets, especially those who had benefited from prior gefitinib treatment. Identification of molecular markers in tumors is important to understand and overcome acquired resistance to gefitinib.
BACKGROUND: Both gefitinib and erlotinib are reversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but they have somewhat different pharmacological properties. We conducted a phase II study of erlotinib after failure of gefitinib treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC who had shown disease progression on gefitinib treatment were treated with erlotinib 150 mg/day until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: Between September 2006 and January 2008, a total of 23 patients were enrolled and all were assessable for response and toxicity. All patients were never smokers and all but one had adenocarcinoma. Of these 23 patients, one had a partial response and one stable disease, resulting in an objective response rate of 4.3% and a disease control rate of 8.7%. These two patients benefited from erlotinib for 6.2 months and 7.8 months, respectively; both had also benefited from prior gefitinib therapy. The most common toxic effects were skin rash and diarrhea. CONCLUSION:Erlotinib should not be given routinely after failure of gefitinib treatment, but can be an option for more highly selected subsets, especially those who had benefited from prior gefitinib treatment. Identification of molecular markers in tumors is important to understand and overcome acquired resistance to gefitinib.
Authors: M Hidalgo; L L Siu; J Nemunaitis; J Rizzo; L A Hammond; C Takimoto; S G Eckhardt; A Tolcher; C D Britten; L Denis; K Ferrante; D D Von Hoff; S Silberman; E K Rowinsky Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Baselga; D Rischin; M Ranson; H Calvert; E Raymond; D G Kieback; S B Kaye; L Gianni; A Harris; T Bjork; S D Averbuch; A Feyereislova; H Swaisland; F Rojo; J Albanell Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susumu Kobayashi; Titus J Boggon; Tajhal Dayaram; Pasi A Jänne; Olivier Kocher; Matthew Meyerson; Bruce E Johnson; Michael J Eck; Daniel G Tenen; Balázs Halmos Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Frances A Shepherd; José Rodrigues Pereira; Tudor Ciuleanu; Eng Huat Tan; Vera Hirsh; Sumitra Thongprasert; Daniel Campos; Savitree Maoleekoonpiroj; Michael Smylie; Renato Martins; Maximiliano van Kooten; Mircea Dediu; Brian Findlay; Dongsheng Tu; Dianne Johnston; Andrea Bezjak; Gary Clark; Pedro Santabárbara; Lesley Seymour Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-07-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nick Thatcher; Alex Chang; Purvish Parikh; José Rodrigues Pereira; Tudor Ciuleanu; Joachim von Pawel; Sumitra Thongprasert; Eng Huat Tan; Kristine Pemberton; Venice Archer; Kevin Carroll Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Oct 29-Nov 4 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Dae Ho Lee; Ji-Youn Han; Hong Gi Lee; Jae Jin Lee; Eun Kyoung Lee; Hyae Young Kim; Hark Kyun Kim; Eun Kyung Hong; Jin Soo Lee Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Nicholas W Choong; Sascha Dietrich; Tanguy Y Seiwert; Maria S Tretiakova; Vidya Nallasura; Gareth C Davies; Stanley Lipkowitz; Aliya N Husain; Ravi Salgia; Patrick C Ma Journal: Nat Clin Pract Oncol Date: 2006-01