Cargando…
Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†)
BACKGROUND: In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report ev...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27084954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw151 |
_version_ | 1782444459660673024 |
---|---|
author | Clement, P. M. Gauler, T. Machiels, J. P. Haddad, R. I. Fayette, J. Licitra, L. F. Tahara, M. Cohen, E. E. W. Cupissol, D. Grau, J. J. Guigay, J. Caponigro, F. de Castro, G. de Souza Viana, L. Keilholz, U. del Campo, J. M. Cong, X. J. Ehrnrooth, E. Vermorken, J. B. |
author_facet | Clement, P. M. Gauler, T. Machiels, J. P. Haddad, R. I. Fayette, J. Licitra, L. F. Tahara, M. Cohen, E. E. W. Cupissol, D. Grau, J. J. Guigay, J. Caponigro, F. de Castro, G. de Souza Viana, L. Keilholz, U. del Campo, J. M. Cong, X. J. Ehrnrooth, E. Vermorken, J. B. |
author_sort | Clement, P. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report evaluates afatinib efficacy and safety in prespecified subgroups of patients aged ≥65 and <65 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to 40 mg/day oral afatinib or 40 mg/m(2)/week intravenous methotrexate. PFS was the primary end point; overall survival (OS) was the key secondary end point. Other end points included: objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, tumor shrinkage, and safety. Disease control rate (DCR) was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 483 randomized patients, 27% (83 afatinib; 45 methotrexate) were aged ≥65 years (older) and 73% (239 afatinib; 116 methotrexate) <65 years (younger) at study entry. Similar PFS benefit with afatinib versus methotrexate was observed in older {median 2.8 versus 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45–1.03], P = 0.061} and younger patients [2.6 versus 1.6 months, HR = 0.79 (0.62–1.01), P = 0.052]. In older and younger patients, the median OS with afatinib versus methotrexate was 7.3 versus 6.4 months [HR = 0.84 (0.54–1.31)] and 6.7 versus 6.2 months [HR = 0.98 (0.76–1.28)]. ORRs with afatinib versus methotrexate were 10.8% versus 6.7% and 10.0% versus 5.2%; DCRs were 53.0% versus 37.8% and 47.7% versus 38.8% in older and younger patients, respectively. In both subgroups, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were rash/acne (73%–77%) and diarrhea (70%–80%) with afatinib, and stomatitis (43%) and fatigue (31%–34%) with methotrexate. Fewer treatment-related discontinuations were observed with afatinib (each subgroup 7% versus 16%). A trend toward improved time to deterioration of global health status, pain, and swallowing with afatinib was observed in both subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing age (≥65 years) did not adversely affect clinical outcomes or safety with afatinib versus methotrexate in second-line R/M HNSCC patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01345682 (ClinicalTrials.gov). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4959921 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49599212016-07-29 Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) Clement, P. M. Gauler, T. Machiels, J. P. Haddad, R. I. Fayette, J. Licitra, L. F. Tahara, M. Cohen, E. E. W. Cupissol, D. Grau, J. J. Guigay, J. Caponigro, F. de Castro, G. de Souza Viana, L. Keilholz, U. del Campo, J. M. Cong, X. J. Ehrnrooth, E. Vermorken, J. B. Ann Oncol Original Articles BACKGROUND: In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report evaluates afatinib efficacy and safety in prespecified subgroups of patients aged ≥65 and <65 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to 40 mg/day oral afatinib or 40 mg/m(2)/week intravenous methotrexate. PFS was the primary end point; overall survival (OS) was the key secondary end point. Other end points included: objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, tumor shrinkage, and safety. Disease control rate (DCR) was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 483 randomized patients, 27% (83 afatinib; 45 methotrexate) were aged ≥65 years (older) and 73% (239 afatinib; 116 methotrexate) <65 years (younger) at study entry. Similar PFS benefit with afatinib versus methotrexate was observed in older {median 2.8 versus 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45–1.03], P = 0.061} and younger patients [2.6 versus 1.6 months, HR = 0.79 (0.62–1.01), P = 0.052]. In older and younger patients, the median OS with afatinib versus methotrexate was 7.3 versus 6.4 months [HR = 0.84 (0.54–1.31)] and 6.7 versus 6.2 months [HR = 0.98 (0.76–1.28)]. ORRs with afatinib versus methotrexate were 10.8% versus 6.7% and 10.0% versus 5.2%; DCRs were 53.0% versus 37.8% and 47.7% versus 38.8% in older and younger patients, respectively. In both subgroups, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were rash/acne (73%–77%) and diarrhea (70%–80%) with afatinib, and stomatitis (43%) and fatigue (31%–34%) with methotrexate. Fewer treatment-related discontinuations were observed with afatinib (each subgroup 7% versus 16%). A trend toward improved time to deterioration of global health status, pain, and swallowing with afatinib was observed in both subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing age (≥65 years) did not adversely affect clinical outcomes or safety with afatinib versus methotrexate in second-line R/M HNSCC patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01345682 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Oxford University Press 2016-08 2016-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4959921/ /pubmed/27084954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw151 Text en © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Clement, P. M. Gauler, T. Machiels, J. P. Haddad, R. I. Fayette, J. Licitra, L. F. Tahara, M. Cohen, E. E. W. Cupissol, D. Grau, J. J. Guigay, J. Caponigro, F. de Castro, G. de Souza Viana, L. Keilholz, U. del Campo, J. M. Cong, X. J. Ehrnrooth, E. Vermorken, J. B. Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title | Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title_full | Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title_fullStr | Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title_full_unstemmed | Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title_short | Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial(†) |
title_sort | afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the lux-head & neck 1 trial(†) |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27084954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw151 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT clementpm afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT gaulert afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT machielsjp afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT haddadri afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT fayettej afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT licitralf afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT taharam afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT coheneew afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT cupissold afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT graujj afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT guigayj afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT caponigrof afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT decastrog afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT desouzavianal afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT keilholzu afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT delcampojm afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT congxj afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT ehrnroothe afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial AT vermorkenjb afatinibversusmethotrexateinolderpatientswithsecondlinerecurrentandormetastaticheadandnecksquamouscellcarcinomasubgroupanalysisoftheluxheadneck1trial |