Affiliation:
1. From the Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Tennessee Oncology, Nashville; Chattanooga Oncology and Hematology Associates, Chattanooga, TN; Virginia Cancer Institute, Richmond, VA; Oncology Hematology Care, Cincinnati; Mid-Ohio Oncology/Hematology, Columbus, OH; and Florida Cancer Specialists, Fort Myers, FL.
Abstract
PurposeSorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, has shown preliminary activity in non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with erlotinib with or without sorafenib in this multicenter phase II trial.Patients and MethodsKey eligibility criteria included the following: stage IIIB or IV NSCLC; one to two prior regimens; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2; and measurable disease. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to sorafenib (400 mg orally twice a day) plus erlotinib (150 mg orally daily) or placebo plus erlotinib and stratified by squamous/nonsquamous histology and prior bevacizumab. Treatment efficacy, measured by progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR), was compared. Treatment of 168 patients allowed detection of 40% improvement in the historical PFS of 2.2 months with single-agent erlotinib.ResultsOne hundred sixty-eight patients enrolled from February 2008 to February 2009. Clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. ORRs for sorafenib/erlotinib and placebo/erlotinib were 8% and 11%, respectively (P = .56); disease control rates were 54% and 38%, respectively (P = .056). Median PFS was 3.38 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 1.94 months for placebo/erlotinib (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.22; P = .196). Seventy-two patients consented to analyses of tumor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In 67 patients with EGFR wild-type (WT) tumors, median PFS was 3.38 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 1.77 months for placebo/erlotinib (P = .018); median overall survival (OS) was 8 months for sorafenib/erlotinib versus 4.5 months for placebo/erlotinib (P = .019). An OS advantage for sorafenib/erlotinib was suggested among 43 patients with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) EGFR-negative tumors (P = .064). Both regimens were tolerable, with modest toxicity increase with sorafenib.ConclusionAlthough there was little difference in ORR or PFS, subset analyses in EGFR WT and EGFR FISH–negative patients suggest a benefit for the combination of erlotinib/sorafenib compared with single-agent erlotinib with respect to PFS and OS.
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)