PURPOSE: This randomized, open-label trial compared dacomitinib (PF-00299804), an irreversible inhibitor of human epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR)/HER1, HER2, and HER4, with erlotinib, a reversible EGFR inhibitor, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2, no prior HER-directed therapy, and one/two prior chemotherapy regimens received dacomitinib 45 mg or erlotinib 150 mg once daily. RESULTS:One hundred eighty-eight patients were randomly assigned. Treatment arms were balanced for most clinical and molecular characteristics. Median progression-free survival (PFS; primary end point) was 2.86 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.91 months for patients treated with erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.91; two-sided P = .012); in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, median PFS was 3.71 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.91 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.85; two-sided P = .006); and in patients with KRAS wild-type/EGFR wild-type tumors, median PFS was 2.21 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.84 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.99; two-sided P = .043). Median overall survival was 9.53 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 7.44 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.13; two-sided P = .205). Adverse event-related discontinuations were uncommon in both arms. Common treatment-related adverse events were dermatologic and gastrointestinal, predominantly grade 1 to 2, and more frequent with dacomitinib. CONCLUSION: Dacomitinib demonstrated significantly improved PFS versus erlotinib, with acceptable toxicity. PFS benefit was observed in most clinical and molecular subsets, notably KRAS wild-type/EGFR any status, KRAS wild-type/EGFR wild-type, and EGFR mutants.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This randomized, open-label trial compared dacomitinib (PF-00299804), an irreversible inhibitor of humanepidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR)/HER1, HER2, and HER4, with erlotinib, a reversible EGFR inhibitor, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2, no prior HER-directed therapy, and one/two prior chemotherapy regimens received dacomitinib 45 mg or erlotinib 150 mg once daily. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-eight patients were randomly assigned. Treatment arms were balanced for most clinical and molecular characteristics. Median progression-free survival (PFS; primary end point) was 2.86 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.91 months for patients treated with erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.91; two-sided P = .012); in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, median PFS was 3.71 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.91 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.85; two-sided P = .006); and in patients with KRAS wild-type/EGFR wild-type tumors, median PFS was 2.21 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 1.84 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.99; two-sided P = .043). Median overall survival was 9.53 months for patients treated with dacomitinib and 7.44 months for patients treated with erlotinib (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.13; two-sided P = .205). Adverse event-related discontinuations were uncommon in both arms. Common treatment-related adverse events were dermatologic and gastrointestinal, predominantly grade 1 to 2, and more frequent with dacomitinib. CONCLUSION:Dacomitinib demonstrated significantly improved PFS versus erlotinib, with acceptable toxicity. PFS benefit was observed in most clinical and molecular subsets, notably KRAS wild-type/EGFR any status, KRAS wild-type/EGFR wild-type, and EGFR mutants.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Sabine Klüter; Jeffrey R Simard; Haridas B Rode; Christian Grütter; Vijaykumar Pawar; Hans C A Raaijmakers; Tjeerd A Barf; Matthias Rabiller; Willem A L van Otterlo; Daniel Rauh Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2010-12-10 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Pasi A Jänne; David S Boss; D Ross Camidge; Carolyn D Britten; Jeffrey A Engelman; Edward B Garon; Feng Guo; Steven Wong; Jane Liang; Stephen Letrent; Robert Millham; Ian Taylor; S Gail Eckhardt; Jan H M Schellens Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-01-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jeffrey M Peppercorn; Thomas J Smith; Paul R Helft; David J Debono; Scott R Berry; Dana S Wollins; Daniel M Hayes; Jamie H Von Roenn; Lowell E Schnipper Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hao Zhang; Kristen Wroblewski; Yulei Jiang; Bill C Penney; Daniel Appelbaum; Cassie A Simon; Ravi Salgia; Yonglin Pu Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Nagdeep Giri; Joanna C Masters; Anna Plotka; Yali Liang; Tanya Boutros; Patricia Pardo; Joseph O'Connell; Carlo Bello Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2015-06-06 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Karen L Reckamp; Marianna Koczywas; Mihaela C Cristea; Jonathan E Dowell; He-Jing Wang; Brian K Gardner; Ginger L Milne; Robert A Figlin; Michael C Fishbein; Robert M Elashoff; Steven M Dubinett Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Greg M Thurber; Thomas Reiner; Katherine S Yang; Rainer H Kohler; Ralph Weissleder Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 6.261