Afatinib as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Subgroup analyses of treatment adherence, safety and mode of afatinib administration in the LUX-Head and Neck 1 trial
Language English Country England, Great Britain Media print-electronic
Document type Clinical Trial, Phase III, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
31450171
DOI
10.1016/j.oraloncology.2019.08.004
PII: S1368-8375(19)30269-6
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Adherence, Afatinib, Feeding tube, HNSCC, Methotrexate, Recurrent/metastatic, Safety,
- MeSH
- Treatment Adherence and Compliance MeSH
- Afatinib therapeutic use MeSH
- Quinazolines administration & dosage MeSH
- Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck drug therapy metabolism MeSH
- ErbB Receptors metabolism MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local drug therapy metabolism MeSH
- Methotrexate administration & dosage MeSH
- Head and Neck Neoplasms drug therapy metabolism MeSH
- Disease-Free Survival MeSH
- Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Afatinib MeSH
- Quinazolines MeSH
- ErbB Receptors MeSH
- Methotrexate MeSH
OBJECTIVES: Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) can experience severe symptom burden and/or difficulty swallowing, leading to problems with treatment adherence/administration. In LUX-Head and Neck 1 (LH&N1; NCT01345682), second-line afatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. We report adherence and safety across pre-specified and additional subgroups potentially linked to afatinib PFS benefit in LH&N1 (p16 status, smoking history), and afatinib adherence, safety and efficacy by administration (oral versus feeding tube; post-hoc analysis). METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m2/week). RESULTS: Among 320 afatinib-treated and 160 methotrexate-treated patients, 83-92% and 76-92% (of patients with data available) across all subgroups took ≥80% of treatment. Across p16 status and smoking history subgroups, the most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (70-91%), rash/acne (72-84%), stomatitis (34-73%) with afatinib; and included stomatitis (39-100%), fatigue (22-50%), nausea (19-36%) with methotrexate. Dose reduction decreased AE incidence/severity. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between oral/feeding tube (n = 276/n = 46) groups. 89%/89% (of patients with data available) took ≥80% of assigned afatinib. Median PFS was 2.6 versus 2.7 months (hazard ratio: 0.997; 95% confidence interval: 0.72-1.38). The most common afatinib-related AEs were: rash/acne (74% versus 74%), diarrhea (73% versus 65%), stomatitis (40% versus 30%). CONCLUSION: Subgroup analyses of LH&N1 demonstrate that afatinib has predictable and manageable safety across patient subgroups, with high treatment adherence, and is effective via oral and feeding tube administration.
Boehringer Ingelheim Investment Co Ltd Shanghai China
Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd Berkshire UK
Centre Antoine Lacassagne FHU OncoAge Université Côte d'Azur Nice France
Department of Head and Neck Medical Oncology National Cancer Center Hospital East Kashiwa Japan
Department of Medical Oncology Antwerp University Hospital Edegem Belgium
Department of Medical Oncology Hospital de Câncer de Barretos Barretos São Paulo Brazil
Department of Medical Oncology Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest Nantes France
Department of Medical Oncology Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine Vandœuvre lès Nancy France
Department of Oncology AC Camargo Cancer Center São Paulo SP Brazil
Department of Oncology KU Leuven Leuven Cancer Institute Leuven Belgium
Department of Oncology Palacky University Medical School Olomouc Czech Republic
Institut du Cancer de Montpellier Val d'Aurelle Montpellier France
Klinische Abteilung für Onkologie Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin Vienna Austria
Medical Department Charité Comprehensive Cancer Center Berlin Germany
Medical Oncology Centre Léon Bérard Lyon France
Moores Cancer Center University of California San Diego La Jolla CA USA
Service d'Oncologie Médicale Centre Georges François Leclerc Dijon Cedex France
References provided by Crossref.org