1222 - Erlotinib in second and third line therapy in advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB and IV), relation with chemotherapy and schedule of administration (a retro...

Date 28 September 2012
Event ESMO Congress 2012
Session Publication Only
Topics Anti-Cancer Agents & Biologic Therapy
Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer, Metastatic
Presenter Alexandru-Calin Grigorescu
Authors A. Grigorescu1, I. Turtoi2, S.E. Boeru3
  • 1Institute of oncology Bucharest, 022328 - Bucharest/RO
  • 2Medical Oncology, Institut of Oncology Bucharest, 022328 - Bucharest/RO
  • 3Medical Oncology, Institute of oncology Bucharest, 022328 - Bucharest/RO



Is now very well known that Erlotinib (E) has an impact in progression free survival and in some study in overall survival in second or third line therapy for advanced non small -cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Aims of the study: This study try to provide data which sustain the use of E in second and third line and the fact that mono-chemotherapy could be active and after treatment with E for some patients (Pt) with advanced NSCLC. In addition we try to find data supporting the use of E for senior adults.

Materials and method

The data from 90 case report forms of Ps with Stage IIIB and IV NSCLC treated with E in Institute of Oncology Bucharest between March 2010 and March 2012 were analyzed regarding clinical benefit, survival and relation with mono- chemotherapy in second or third line. In particular we purposed to point out the benefit of senior adults treated with E and the possible benefit of chemotherapy with a single agent after failure of treatment with E. Main symptoms were evaluated by Edmonton scale. Statistical analysis was perform by Caplan Meyer curve and X2 test.


86 Pt were valuable, 17 with stage IIIB and 69 stage IV. The overall survival for the Pt included in this study was 17 month. The survival in second line therapy with E was 7 month (CI: 3.6 – 10.3) and the survival after third line chemotherapy was 3 month (CI:2.1-3.8). On the whole the clinical benefit was 90% of Pt. The response rate for chemotherapy in third line after E was 8% but symptomatic benefit was in 15% of Pt. As a function of waiting time to receive E in second line it was a higher response rate in Ps who received E without waiting time, toxicity of E was represented by rash grade I 80%, diarrhea 10%, dizziness 3%, ocular dysfunctions 2%. Grade III of toxicity was observed only in 3% of patients. Toxicity for senior adults treated by E. was similar with younger Pt.


Despite the limits of a retrospective study we can conclude that E is useful in second and third line treatment for advanced lung cancer, chemotherapy could have benefit in third line after E, and senior adults have about the some response and benefit from E. Toxicity was reduced for all Pt treated with E.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.