Background In most cases, T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients receiving osimertinib developed "non-drugable" progression, as the patients with common EGFR-sensitizing mutations were treated with first-line osimertinib. In both settings, chemotherapy represents the standard treatment and local ablative treatments (LATs) are potential useful options in the case of oligo-progression. Methods We conducted a study on "post-progression" (pp) outcomes of T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients treated with osimertinib, according to the therapeutic strategy applied: osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs), "switched therapies" or best supportive care only (BSC). Results 144 consecutive patients were evaluated: 53 (36.8%) did not received post-progression treatments (BSC), while 91 (63.2%) patients received at least 1 subsequent treatment; 50 patients (54.9%) received osimertinib beyond disease progression [19 (20.9%) of them with adjunctive LATs] and 41 (45.1%) a switched therapy. Median ppPFS (progression-free survival) and median ppOS (overall survival) of patients who received osimertinib beyond progression vs. switched therapies were 6.4 months vs. 4.7 months, respectively [HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.35-0.92), p = 0.0239] and 11.3 months vs 7.8 months, respectively [HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.33-0.98), p = 0.0446]. Among patients who received osimertinib beyond progression with and without LATs median ppPFS was 6.4 months and 5.7 months, respectively [HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.68-1.18), p = 0.4560], while median ppOS was 20.2 months and 9.9 months, respectively [HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.52-1.03), p = 0.0748]. At the univariate analysis, the only factor significantly related to the ppPFS was the therapeutic strategy in favor of osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs). Moreover, the only variable which was significantly related to ppOS at the multivariate analysis was osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs). Conclusion Our study confirmed that in clinical practice, in case of "non-druggable" disease progression, maintaining osimertinib beyond progression (with adjunctive LATs) is an effective option.

Osimertinib beyond disease progression in T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients: a multicenter study of clinicians’ attitudes / Cortellini, A.; Leonetti, A.; Catino, A.; Pizzutillo, P.; Ricciuti, B.; De Giglio, A.; Chiari, R.; Bordi, P.; Santini, D.; Giusti, R.; De Tursi, M.; Brocco, D.; Zoratto, F.; Rastelli, F.; Citarella, F.; Russano, M.; Filetti, M.; Marchetti, P.; Berardi, R.; Torniai, M.; Cortinovis, D.; Sala, E.; Maggioni, C.; Follador, A.; Macerelli, M.; Nigro, O.; Tuzi, A.; Iacono, D.; Migliorino, M. R.; Banna, G.; Porzio, G.; Cannita, K.; Ferrara, M. G.; Bria, E.; Galetta, D.; Ficorella, C.; Tiseo, M.. - In: CLINICAL & TRANSLATIONAL ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 1699-048X. - 22:6(2020), pp. 844-851. [10.1007/s12094-019-02193-w]

Osimertinib beyond disease progression in T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients: a multicenter study of clinicians’ attitudes

Tiseo M.
2020

Abstract

Background In most cases, T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients receiving osimertinib developed "non-drugable" progression, as the patients with common EGFR-sensitizing mutations were treated with first-line osimertinib. In both settings, chemotherapy represents the standard treatment and local ablative treatments (LATs) are potential useful options in the case of oligo-progression. Methods We conducted a study on "post-progression" (pp) outcomes of T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients treated with osimertinib, according to the therapeutic strategy applied: osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs), "switched therapies" or best supportive care only (BSC). Results 144 consecutive patients were evaluated: 53 (36.8%) did not received post-progression treatments (BSC), while 91 (63.2%) patients received at least 1 subsequent treatment; 50 patients (54.9%) received osimertinib beyond disease progression [19 (20.9%) of them with adjunctive LATs] and 41 (45.1%) a switched therapy. Median ppPFS (progression-free survival) and median ppOS (overall survival) of patients who received osimertinib beyond progression vs. switched therapies were 6.4 months vs. 4.7 months, respectively [HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.35-0.92), p = 0.0239] and 11.3 months vs 7.8 months, respectively [HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.33-0.98), p = 0.0446]. Among patients who received osimertinib beyond progression with and without LATs median ppPFS was 6.4 months and 5.7 months, respectively [HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.68-1.18), p = 0.4560], while median ppOS was 20.2 months and 9.9 months, respectively [HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.52-1.03), p = 0.0748]. At the univariate analysis, the only factor significantly related to the ppPFS was the therapeutic strategy in favor of osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs). Moreover, the only variable which was significantly related to ppOS at the multivariate analysis was osimertinib beyond progression (+/- LATs). Conclusion Our study confirmed that in clinical practice, in case of "non-druggable" disease progression, maintaining osimertinib beyond progression (with adjunctive LATs) is an effective option.
Osimertinib beyond disease progression in T790M EGFR-positive NSCLC patients: a multicenter study of clinicians’ attitudes / Cortellini, A.; Leonetti, A.; Catino, A.; Pizzutillo, P.; Ricciuti, B.; De Giglio, A.; Chiari, R.; Bordi, P.; Santini, D.; Giusti, R.; De Tursi, M.; Brocco, D.; Zoratto, F.; Rastelli, F.; Citarella, F.; Russano, M.; Filetti, M.; Marchetti, P.; Berardi, R.; Torniai, M.; Cortinovis, D.; Sala, E.; Maggioni, C.; Follador, A.; Macerelli, M.; Nigro, O.; Tuzi, A.; Iacono, D.; Migliorino, M. R.; Banna, G.; Porzio, G.; Cannita, K.; Ferrara, M. G.; Bria, E.; Galetta, D.; Ficorella, C.; Tiseo, M.. - In: CLINICAL & TRANSLATIONAL ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 1699-048X. - 22:6(2020), pp. 844-851. [10.1007/s12094-019-02193-w]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11381/2862680
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 15
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact