Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

487P - Afatinib versus gefitinib or erlotinib in first-line setting for Malaysia patients with EGFR mutant advanced lung adenocarcinoma

Date

23 Nov 2019

Session

Poster display session

Topics

Tumour Site

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Presenters

Chee Shee Chai

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2019) 30 (suppl_9): ix157-ix181. 10.1093/annonc/mdz437

Authors

C.S. Chai1, C.K. Liam2, O. Po Lin3, Y.K. Pang4, G.F. Ho5, A. Alip6, C.K. Wong2, M.E. Poh2, J.L. Tan2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University Malaysia Sarawak, 94300 - Kota Samarahan/MY
  • 2 Medicine, University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), 59100 - Kuala Lumpur/MY
  • 3 Clinical Oncology Department, UMMC - University Malaya Medical Centre, 59100 - Kuala Lumpur/MY
  • 4 Medicine, University Malaya Medical Center, 59100 - Kuala Lumpur/MY
  • 5 Dept Of Clinical Oncology, University Malaya Medical Center, 59100 - Kuala Lumpur/MY
  • 6 Clinical Oncology, University of Malaya Faculty of Medicine, 50603 - Kuala Lumpur/MY

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 487P

Background

Afatinib is an irreversible second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) while gefitinib or erlotinib are reversible first-generation EGFR-TKIs.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients with EGFR mutant advanced lung adenocarcinoma receiving first-line afatinib versus gefitinib or erlotinib at University Malaya Medical Centre from 1st January 2015 to 31th December 2018.

Results

Of 113 patients, 24 (21.2%) received afatinib, 63 (55.8%) received gefitinib and 26 (23.0%) received erlotinib in first-line setting. Their demographic and clinical characteristics are shown in the table. Afatinib was used significantly more frequently in patients with rare or complex EGFR mutations (p = 0.005), and more often in patients with symptomatic brain metastases. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) of patients treated with afatinib (13.1 months) was longer than that of patients treated with gefitinib (10.9 months) or erlotinib (7.8 months) (p = 0.479). Patients receiving afatinib had consistently longer PFS than patients receiving gefitinib for the first 17 months and erlotinib for the first 20 months. The overall response rate was higher in patients on afatinib (75.0%) than those on gefitinib (63.5%) or erlotinib (53.8%). There was no difference in the disease control rate. Three patients (2.7%) had severe side-effects while on EGFR-TKI. Of two patients on afatinib, one had grade-3 diarrhea while another had grade 3 stomatitis, rash and paronychia. One patient had grade 3 rash on gefitinib.Table:

487P Clinical characteristic of 113 patients on first-line EGFR-TKI

Characteristics, No (%)Afatinib (24)Gefitinib (63)Erlotinib (26)p-value
Symp brain metsNo Yes17 (70.8) 7 (29.2)53 (84.1) 10 (15.9)22 (84.6) 4 (15.4)0.181
EGFR subtype19 del 21 L858R Rare/complex16 (66.7) 2 (8.3) 6 (25.0)39 (61.9) 20 (31.7) 4 (6.3)22 (84.6) 3 (11.5) 1 (3.8)0.005
Side-effectgrade 1-2 grade 322 (91.7) 2 (8.3)62 (98.4) 1 (1.6)26 (100) 00.007
Objective responseYes No18 (75.0) 6 (25.0)40 (63.5) 23 (36.5)14 (53.8) 12 (46.2)0.298
Disease controlYes No23 (95.8) 1 (4.2)59 (93.7) 4 (6.3)24 (92.3) 2 (7.7)0.872
Median PFSMonths Event, No. (%)13.1 19 (79.2)10.9 49 (77.8)7.8 19 (73.1)0.479

Conclusions

Patients receiving first-line afatinib demonstrated longer mPFS than those on first-line gefitinib or erlotinib. The lack of statistical significance in this study is because of the small number of patients treated with afatinib, more frequent rare or complex EGFR mutations and more symptomatic brain metastases among afatinib treated patients.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.