David R Spigel1, Thomas J Ervin, Rodryg A Ramlau, Davey B Daniel, Jerome H Goldschmidt, George R Blumenschein, Maciej J Krzakowski, Gilles Robinet, Benoit Godbert, Fabrice Barlesi, Ramaswamy Govindan, Taral Patel, Sergey V Orlov, Michael S Wertheim, Wei Yu, Jiping Zha, Robert L Yauch, Premal H Patel, See-Chun Phan, Amy C Peterson. 1. David R. Spigel, Thomas J. Ervin, and Davey B. Daniel, Sarah Cannon Research Institute; David R. Spigel, Tennessee Oncology, Nashville; Davey B. Daniel, Chattanooga Oncology Hematology Associates, Chattanooga, TN; Thomas J. Ervin, Florida Cancer Specialists, Fort Myers; Michael S. Wertheim, Hematology/Oncology Associates, Port St Lucie, FL; Rodryg A. Ramlau, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan; Maciej J. Krzakowski, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland; Jerome H. Goldschmidt Jr, Blue Ridge Cancer Care, Christianburg, VA; George R. Blumenschein Jr, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Gilles Robinet, University Hospital Morvan, Brest; Benoit Godbert, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nancy, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy; Fabrice Barlesi, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France; Ramaswamy Govindan, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO; Taral Patel, Mid Ohio Oncology/Hematology, Columbus, OH; Sergey V. Orlov, St Petersburg Pavlov State Medical University, St Petersburg, Russia; Wei Yu, Robert L. Yauch, Premal H. Patel, and See-Chun Phan, Genentech; Amy C. Peterson, Medivation, San Francisco, CA; and Jiping Zha, Crown Bioscience, Taicang City, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with poor prognosis and acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -targeted drugs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether dual inhibition of MET/EGFR results in clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive onartuzumab plus erlotinib or placebo plus erlotinib; crossover was allowed at progression. Tumor tissue was required to assess MET status by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive (MET IHC diagnostic positive) populations; additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: There was no improvement in PFS or OS in the ITT population (n = 137; PFS hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P = .69; OS HR, 0.80; P = .34). MET-positive patients (n = 66) treated with erlotinib plus onartuzumab showed improvement in both PFS (HR, .53; P = .04) and OS (HR, .37; P = .002). Conversely, clinical outcomes were worse in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.82; P = .05; OS HR, 1.78; P = .16). MET-positive control patients had worse outcomes versus MET-negative control patients (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.71; P = .06; OS HR, 2.61; P = .004). Incidence of peripheral edema was increased in onartuzumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION:Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with poor prognosis and acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -targeted drugs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether dual inhibition of MET/EGFR results in clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive onartuzumab plus erlotinib or placebo plus erlotinib; crossover was allowed at progression. Tumor tissue was required to assess MET status by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive (MET IHC diagnostic positive) populations; additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: There was no improvement in PFS or OS in the ITT population (n = 137; PFS hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P = .69; OS HR, 0.80; P = .34). MET-positive patients (n = 66) treated with erlotinib plus onartuzumab showed improvement in both PFS (HR, .53; P = .04) and OS (HR, .37; P = .002). Conversely, clinical outcomes were worse in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.82; P = .05; OS HR, 1.78; P = .16). MET-positive control patients had worse outcomes versus MET-negative control patients (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.71; P = .06; OS HR, 2.61; P = .004). Incidence of peripheral edema was increased in onartuzumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION:Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.
Authors: Rafael Rosell; Enric Carcereny; Radj Gervais; Alain Vergnenegre; Bartomeu Massuti; Enriqueta Felip; Ramon Palmero; Ramon Garcia-Gomez; Cinta Pallares; Jose Miguel Sanchez; Rut Porta; Manuel Cobo; Pilar Garrido; Flavia Longo; Teresa Moran; Amelia Insa; Filippo De Marinis; Romain Corre; Isabel Bover; Alfonso Illiano; Eric Dansin; Javier de Castro; Michele Milella; Noemi Reguart; Giuseppe Altavilla; Ulpiano Jimenez; Mariano Provencio; Miguel Angel Moreno; Josefa Terrasa; Jose Muñoz-Langa; Javier Valdivia; Dolores Isla; Manuel Domine; Olivier Molinier; Julien Mazieres; Nathalie Baize; Rosario Garcia-Campelo; Gilles Robinet; Delvys Rodriguez-Abreu; Guillermo Lopez-Vivanco; Vittorio Gebbia; Lioba Ferrera-Delgado; Pierre Bombaron; Reyes Bernabe; Alessandra Bearz; Angel Artal; Enrico Cortesi; Christian Rolfo; Maria Sanchez-Ronco; Ana Drozdowskyj; Cristina Queralt; Itziar de Aguirre; Jose Luis Ramirez; Jose Javier Sanchez; Miguel Angel Molina; Miquel Taron; Luis Paz-Ares Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2012-01-26 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Tobias Martens; Nils-Ole Schmidt; Carmen Eckerich; Regina Fillbrandt; Mark Merchant; Ralph Schwall; Manfred Westphal; Katrin Lamszus Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-10-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Patrick C Ma; Ramasamy Jagadeeswaran; Simha Jagadeesh; Maria S Tretiakova; Vidya Nallasura; Edward A Fox; Mark Hansen; Erik Schaefer; Katsuhiko Naoki; Alan Lader; William Richards; David Sugarbaker; Aliya N Husain; James G Christensen; Ravi Salgia Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-02-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Ailan Guo; Judit Villén; Jon Kornhauser; Kimberly A Lee; Matthew P Stokes; Klarisa Rikova; Anthony Possemato; Julie Nardone; Gregory Innocenti; Randall Wetzel; Yi Wang; Joan MacNeill; Jeffrey Mitchell; Steven P Gygi; John Rush; Roberto D Polakiewicz; Michael J Comb Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-01-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Edward A Levine; Konstantinos I Votanopoulos; Shadi A Qasem; John Philip; Kathleen A Cummins; Jeff W Chou; Jimmy Ruiz; Ralph D'Agostino; Perry Shen; Lance D Miller Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Daria Gaut; Myung Shin Sim; Yuguang Yue; Brian R Wolf; Phillip A Abarca; James M Carroll; Jonathan W Goldman; Edward B Garon Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Daniel V T Catenacci; Niall C Tebbutt; Irina Davidenko; André M Murad; Salah-Eddin Al-Batran; David H Ilson; Sergei Tjulandin; Evengy Gotovkin; Boguslawa Karaszewska; Igor Bondarenko; Mohamedtaki A Tejani; Anghel A Udrea; Mustapha Tehfe; Ferdinando De Vita; Cheryl Turkington; Rui Tang; Agnes Ang; Yilong Zhang; Tien Hoang; Roger Sidhu; David Cunningham Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-09-25 Impact factor: 41.316