Literature DB >> 32479794

Tepotinib plus gefitinib in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer with MET overexpression or MET amplification and acquired resistance to previous EGFR inhibitor (INSIGHT study): an open-label, phase 1b/2, multicentre, randomised trial.

Yi-Long Wu1, Ying Cheng2, Jianying Zhou3, Shun Lu4, Yiping Zhang5, Jun Zhao6, Dong-Wan Kim7, Ross Andrew Soo8, Sang-We Kim9, Hongming Pan10, Yuh-Min Chen11, Chih-Feng Chian12, Xiaoqing Liu13, Daniel Shao Weng Tan14, Rolf Bruns15, Josef Straub16, Andreas Johne17, Jürgen Scheele17, Keunchil Park18, James Chih-Hsin Yang19.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a potent and highly selective oral MET inhibitor, plus gefitinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET overexpression (immunohistochemistry [IHC]2+ or IHC3+) or MET amplification having acquired resistance to EGFR inhibition.
METHODS: In this open-label, phase 1b/2, multicentre, randomised trial (the INSIGHT study), we enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, from academic medical centres and community clinics in six Asian countries. In phase 1b, patients received oral tepotinib 300 mg or 500 mg plus gefitinib 250 mg once daily. In phase 2, patients with EGFR-mutant, T790M-negative NSCLC MET overexpression or MET amplification were randomly assigned (initially in a 1:1 ratio and then 2:1 following a protocol amendment) to tepotinib plus gefitinib at the recommended phase 2 dose or to standard platinum doublet chemotherapy. Randomisation was done centrally via an interactive voice-response system. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Subgroup analyses were preplanned in patients with high MET overexpression (IHC3+) or MET amplification (mean gene copy number ≥5 or MET to centromere of chromosome 7 ratio ≥2). Efficacy and patient characteristics were assessed on an intention-to-treat basis and safety was assessed for all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Low recruitment led to early termination of phase 2, so all analyses are considered to be exploratory. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01982955, and the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database, Eudra-CT 2016-001604-28.
FINDINGS: From Dec 23, 2013, to May 25, 2017, 18 patients were enrolled in phase 1b (n=6 in the 300 mg tepotinib group; n=12 in the 500 mg tepotinib group) and 55 patients in phase 2 (n=31 in the tepotinib plus gefitinib group; n=24 in the chemotherapy group). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in phase 1b, so tepotinib 500 mg was used as the recommended phase 2 dose. In phase 2, survival outcomes were similar between groups: median PFS was 4·9 months in the tepotinib plus gefitinib group (90% CI 3·9-6·9) versus 4·4 months in the chemotherapy group (90% CI 4·2-6·8; hazard ratio [HR] 0·67, 90% CI 0·35-1·28). Median OS was 17·3 months in the tepotinib plus gefitinib group (12·1-37·3) versus 18·7 months in the chemotherapy group (15·9-20·7; HR 0·69, 0·34-1·41). PFS and OS were longer with tepotinib plus gefitinib than with chemotherapy in patients with high (IHC3+) MET overexpression (n=34; median PFS 8·3 months [4·1-16·6] vs 4·4 months [4·1-6·8]; HR 0·35, 0·17-0·74; median OS 37·3 months [90% CI 24·2-37·3] vs 17·9 months [12·0-20·7]; HR 0·33, 0·14-0·76) or MET amplification (n=19; median PFS 16·6 months [8·3-not estimable] vs 4·2 months [1·4-7·0]; HR 0·13, 0·04-0·43; median OS 37·3 months [90% CI not estimable] vs 13·1 months [3·25-not estimable]; HR 0·08, 0·01-0·51). The most frequent treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events were increased amylase (5 [16%] of 31 patients) and lipase (4 [13%]) concentrations in the tepotinib plus gefitinib group and anaemia (7 [30%] of 23 patients) and decreased neutrophil count (3 [13%]) in the chemotherapy group.
INTERPRETATION: Despite early study termination, in a preplanned subgroup analysis, our findings suggest improved anti activity for tepotinib plus gefitinib compared with standard chemotherapy in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and MET amplification, warranting further exploration. FUNDING: Merck KGaA.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32479794     DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30154-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Respir Med        ISSN: 2213-2600            Impact factor:   30.700


  52 in total

Review 1.  Overcoming therapy resistance in EGFR-mutant lung cancer.

Authors:  Pasi A Jänne; Tony Mok; Solange Peters; Antonio Passaro
Journal:  Nat Cancer       Date:  2021-04-15

Review 2.  Targeting Acquired and Intrinsic Resistance Mechanisms in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Manan P Shah; Joel W Neal
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  MET overexpression in EGFR L858R mutant treatment-naïve advanced lung adenocarcinoma correlated with poor prognosis: a real-world retrospective study.

Authors:  Na Wang; Yili Zhu; Ying Wu; Bo Huang; Junhua Wu; Ruiguang Zhang; Jun Fan; Xiu Nie
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 4.322

Review 4.  Small-molecule inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and more: FDA-approved novel therapeutic drugs for solid tumors from 1991 to 2021.

Authors:  Qing Wu; Wei Qian; Xiaoli Sun; Shaojie Jiang
Journal:  J Hematol Oncol       Date:  2022-10-08       Impact factor: 23.168

Review 5.  New Strategies and Novel Combinations in EGFR TKI-Resistant Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Nicolas Girard
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2022-10-15

Review 6.  Potentiating Therapeutic Effects of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibition in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Kyu Sic You; Yong Weon Yi; Jeonghee Cho; Jeong-Soo Park; Yeon-Sun Seong
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-18

Review 7.  When the MET receptor kicks in to resist targeted therapies.

Authors:  Marie Fernandes; Philippe Jamme; Alexis B Cortot; Zoulika Kherrouche; David Tulasne
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 9.867

8.  Translational pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of preclinical and clinical data of the oral MET inhibitor tepotinib to determine the recommended phase II dose.

Authors:  Wenyuan Xiong; Manja Friese-Hamim; Andreas Johne; Christopher Stroh; Manfred Klevesath; Gerald S Falchook; David S Hong; Pascal Girard; Samer El Bawab
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2021-05-01

Review 9.  MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: An Overview of Biology, Clinical Outcomes, and Testing Considerations.

Authors:  Mark A Socinski; Nathan A Pennell; Kurtis D Davies
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2021-04-13

Review 10.  HGF/c-MET pathway in cancer: from molecular characterization to clinical evidence.

Authors:  Jianjiang Fu; Xiaorui Su; Zhihua Li; Ling Deng; Xiawei Liu; Xuancheng Feng; Juan Peng
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 9.867

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.