Clinical Impact of two Different Diagnostic Strategies in the First- and Second-Line Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic EGFR-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Giovanni Gancitano, Roberto Ravasio, Lorenzo Cattelino, Paolo Di Procolo, Diego Cortinovis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v21i1.1450

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A histopathological and mutational diagnosis has become a priority in the correct choice of the most appropriate cancer therapy for NSCLC. In the absence of a molecular analysis, the therapeutic choice will be directed towards platinum-based chemotherapy, thus preventing, in the presence of a specific mutation, the benefits deriving from the administration of a target therapies (TT).
AIM: the present analysis was carried out with the aim of estimating the clinical impact, expressed in terms of progression free survival (PFS), associated with the use of the combined strategy (tissue biopsy and liquid biopsy) or the tissue strategy in the EGFR+ mNSCLC population.
METHODS: A pre-existing cost-consequence model was adapted to estimate the annual number of mNSCLC patients with or without the EGFR mutation in order to decide the oncological treatment to be administered in first (1L) or second line (2L). In 1L, against the presence of the EGFR mutation, the administration of a Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI), such as osimertinib, gefitinib, erlotinib or afatinib, was considered; in the absence of the EGFR mutation, the administration of
standard platinum-based chemotherapy was instead considered. With reference to 2L, in the presence of the EGFR T790M mutation, only osimertinib was considered. In the absence of the EGFR T790M mutation, the administration of the standard platinum-based chemotherapy was also considered. The PFS data associated with each of the drugs considered were extrapolated from the respective clinical studies. Key variables were tested in the sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS: The adoption of the combined strategy (tissue biopsy and liquid biopsy), by virtue of a greater number of patients treated with TKIs, would make it possible to increase the average PFS in the range of 1.1-3,7 months in the 1L and by 1.4 months in the 2L.
CONCLUSION: These results show how the adoption of a correct diagnostic strategy is critical in order to optimize the choice of the therapeutic path in the 1L and 2L of mNSCLC. The addition of the liquid biopsy to the classic diagnostic path (tissue biopsy) would in fact allow to obtain an increase in therapeutic efficacy (average PFS).

Keywords

Liquid biopsy; Tissue biopsy; NSCLC; Italian NHS; PFS

Full Text

HTML PDF

References

  • AIOM, AIRTUM e Fondazione AIOM. I numeri del cancro in Italia 2018. Available at: https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_NumeriCancro-operatori.pdf (last accessed September 2019)
  • Lim C, Sung M, Shepherd FA, et al. Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Are Research Biopsies a Barrier to Participation in Clinical Trials?. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11: 79-84; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2015.09.006
  • Gobbini E, Galetta D, Tiseo M, et al. Molecular profiling in Italian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: An observational prospective study. Lung Cancer 2017; 111: 30-7; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.06.009
  • Chan BA, Hughes BG. Targeted therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: current standards and the promise of the future. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2015; 4: 36-54; https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2014.05.01
  • Chouaid C, Dujon C, Do P, et al. Feasibility and clinical impact of re-biopsy in advanced non small-cell lung cancer: a prospective multicenter study in a real-world setting (GFPC study 12-01). Lung Cancer 2014; 86: 170-3; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.08.016
  • Ellis PM, Blais N, Soulieres D, et al. A systematic review and Canadian consensus recommendations on the use of biomarkers in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2011; 6: 1379-91; https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e318220cb8e
  • Peters S, Adjei AA, Gridelli C, et al. Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2012; 23 Suppl 7: vii56-64; https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mds226
  • Gancitano G, Ravasio R, Dionisi M, et al. Cost-Consequence Analysis of Three Different Diagnostic Strategies in the First- and Second-Line Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Farmeconomia. Health economics and therapeutic pathways 2018; 19: 27-35; https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v19i1.1354
  • AIOM, AIRTUM e Fondazione AIOM. I numeri del cancro in Italia 2016. Available at: http://www.registri-tumori.it/PDF/AIOM2016/I_numeri_del_cancro_2016.pdf (last accessed January 2018)
  • Draheim S, Eisinger B, Förster S, et al. Krebsinzidenz und Krebsmortalität 2009-2012. Available at: https://www.berlin.de/gkr/_assets/jahresbericht-2009-2012.pdf (last accessed January 2018)
  • Lim C, Sung M, Shepherd FA, et al. Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Are Research Biopsies a Barrier to Participation in Clinical Trials?. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11: 79-84; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2015.09.006
  • Malapelle U, Sirera R, Jantus-Lewintre E, et al. Profile of the Roche cobas® EGFR mutation test v2 for non-small cell lung cancer. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2017; 17: 209-15; https://doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2017.1288568
  • Yoon HJ, Lee HY, Lee KS, et al. Repeat biopsy for mutational analysis of non-small cell lung cancers resistant to previous chemotherapy: adequacy and complications. Radiology 2012; 265: 939-48; https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12112613
  • Jenkins S, Yang JC, Ramalingam SS, et al. Plasma ctDNA Analysis for Detection of the EGFR T790M Mutation in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2017; 12: 1061-70; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2017.04.003
  • Cheng MM, Palma JF, Scudder S, Poulios N, Liesenfeld O. The Clinical and Economic Impact of Inaccurate EGFR Mutation Tests in the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. J Pers Med 2017; 7: 5; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm7030005
  • Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica – AIOM. Linee guida neoplasie del polmone. Edizione 2019.Available at: https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019_LG_AIOM_Polmone-1.pdf (last accessed December 2019)
  • Soria JC, Ohe Y, Vansteenkiste J, et al. Osimertinib in Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 378: 113-25; https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1713137
  • Mok TS, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 947-57; https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0810699
  • Han JY, Park K, Kim SW, et al. First-SIGNAL: first-line single-agent iressa versus gemcitabine and cisplatin trial in never-smokers with adenocarcinoma of the lung. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1122-8; https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.36.8456
  • Mitsudomi T, Morita S, Yatabe Y, et al. Gefitinib versus cisplatin plus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (WJTOG3405): an open label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 121-8; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70364-X
  • Maemondo M, Inoue A, Kobayashi K, et al. Gefitinib or chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 2380-8; https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0909530
  • Park K, Tan EH, O’Byrne K, et al. Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 577-89; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30033-X
  • Zhou C, Wu YL, Chen G, et al. Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 735-42; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70184-X
  • Rosell R, Carcereny E, Gervais R, et al. Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 239-46; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70393-X
  • Sequist LV, Yang JC, Yamamoto N, et al. Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 3327-34; https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.44.2806
  • Wu YL, Zhou C, Hu CP, et al. Afatinib versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine for first-line treatment of Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring EGFR mutations (LUX-Lung 6): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: 213-22; https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70604-1
  • Mok TS, Wu Y-L, Ahn M-J, et al. Osimertinib or Platinum-Pemetrexed in EGFR T790M-Positive Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 629-40; https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1612674
  • AIES – Associazione Italiana di Economia Sanitaria. Proposte di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari. Pharmacoeconomics Italian Research Articles 2009; 11: 89-93
  • Diaz LA Jr, Bardelli A. Liquid biopsies: genotyping circulating tumor DNA. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 579-86; https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.45.2011
  • Paolini D, Tiseo M, Demma F, et al. Ventana ALK (D5F3) in the Detection of Patients Affected by Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-positive Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer: Clinical and Budget Effect. Clin Lung Cancer 2018; 19: e735-43; .https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2018.05.012
  • Gruppo di Lavoro AIOM – SIAPEC-IAP – SIF – SIBioC. Raccomandazioni per l’esecuzione di test molecolari su biopsia liquida in oncologia 2018. Available at https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/2018_biopsialiquida.pdf (last accessed September 2019)

Statistics

Abstract: 348 views
HTML: 104 views
PDF: 45 views

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




© SEEd srl