Afatinib + Cetuximab versus Afatinib Alone for the First-Line Treatment of EGFR-Mutant NSCLC (SWOG S1403)

2020 Year in Review: Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer —February 6, 2021

Categories:

Lung Cancer

Similar progression-free survival and 2-year overall survival rates reported for both treatment groups, with more grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events reported in the afatinib + cetuximab group.

Although single-agent EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is considered standard first-line treatment in patients with EGFR-mutated non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), it is not curative and is associated with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 10 to 12 months. The combination of afatinib, which is an ErbB family TKI, and the EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab has been shown to overcome resistance to EGFR TKIs.1

SWOG S1403 was a randomized phase 2 trial to evaluate afatinib 40 mg once daily plus cetuximab 500 mg/m2 intravenously every 2 weeks versus afatinib alone in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC without prior treatment of advanced disease.2 The trial was closed at the interim analysis because of insufficient evidence to support accrual; the researchers reported the final results of the trial during the 2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program. The primary end point was PFS. Secondary end points included overall response rate, overall survival (OS), and toxicity (as graded by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria version 4.0).2

A total of 168 treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC were randomized to receive afatinib + cetuximab (N = 89) or afatinib alone (N = 85).2 Patients had stage IV or recurrent NSCLC with a common sensitizing EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or L858R point mutation) and had not received prior systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic disease or any prior EGFR TKI.2

Median PFS was comparable between the treatment groups: 11.9 months in the afatinib + cetuximab group versus 13.4 months in the afatinib group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-1.43; P = .94).2 Among the 153 patients with an evaluable assessment, a confirmed or unconfirmed response was reported in 67% of the afatinib + cetuximab group and 74% of the afatinib group (P = .38). The rates of 2-year OS were also similar: 67% in the afatinib + cetuximab group versus 70% in the afatinib group (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50-1.36; P = .44).2

Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred more frequently in the afatinib + cetuximab group compared with the afatinib group (72% vs 40%); the most frequent grade ≥3 TRAEs were acneiform rash (27% vs 2%), diarrhea (15% vs 20%), and maculopapular rash (13% vs 0%).2 Dose reductions of afatinib to 30 mg were more common in patients receiving afatinib + cetuximab compared with those receiving afatinib alone (56.7% vs 26.2%); however, afatinib reductions to 20 mg occurred at similar rates between the treatment groups (13.6% vs 16.7%).2

The researchers concluded that afatinib + cetuximab did not improve clinical outcomes compared with afatinib alone in patients with treatment-naïve, EGFR-mutated NSCLC.2

References
1. Janjigian YY, et al. Cancer Discov. 2014;4:1036-1045.
2. Goldberg SB, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:4076-4085.

Related Articles
Sotorasib Conveys Long-Term Benefits in Patients With KRAS G12C–Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer
Web Exclusives
Analysis of the long-term results of the CodeBreak 100 clinical trial showed that sotorasib demonstrated long-term efficacy, in particular among patients with low initial circulating tumor DNA values.
NGS Testing More Cost-Effective Than SGT in Oncology
Web Exclusives
A recent study showed that next-generation sequencing testing has superior cost benefit when compared with single-gene testing for multiple cancer types, including non–small cell lung cancer.
Phase 3 Study of Sotorasib in NSCLC Demonstrated Shorter PFS Than Phase 1/2 Trials
Web Exclusives
Analysis of the phase 3 study of sotorasib in patients with non–small cell lung cancer found faster time to response compared with docetaxel but a shorter progression-free survival than what was seen in the phase 1/2 trials.
Last modified: August 10, 2023

Subscribe Today!

To sign up for our print publication or e-newsletter, please enter your contact information below.

I'd like to receive:

  • First Name *
    Last Name *
     
     
    Profession or Role
    Primary Specialty or Disease State
    Country