Department of Medical Oncology, Shanghai Chest Hospital Shanghai JiaoTong University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Cancer Center, Union Hospital Tongji Medical College Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, P. R. China.
Cancer Commun (Lond). 2024 Sep;44(9):1005-1017. doi: 10.1002/cac2.12594. Epub 2024 Jul 17.
The initial randomized, double-blinded, actively controlled, phase III ANEAS study (NCT03849768) demonstrated that aumolertinib showed superior efficacy relative to gefitinib as first-line therapy in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Metastatic disease in the central nervous system (CNS) remains a challenge in the management of NSCLC. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of aumolertinib versus gefitinib among patients with baseline CNS metastases in the ANEAS study.
Eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to orally receive either aumolertinib or gefitinib in a double-blinded fashion. Patients with asymptomatic, stable CNS metastases were included. Follow-up imaging of the same modality as the initial CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 15 months, then every 12 weeks. CNS response was assessed by a neuroradiological blinded, independent central review (neuroradiological-BICR). The primary endpoint for this subgroup analysis was CNS progression-free survival (PFS).
Of the 429 patients enrolled and randomized in the ANEAS study, 106 patients were found to have CNS metastases (CNS Full Analysis Set, cFAS) at baseline by neuroradiological-BICR, and 60 of them had CNS target lesions (CNS Evaluable for Response, cEFR). Treatment with aumolertinib significantly prolonged median CNS PFS compared with gefitinib in both cFAS (29.0 vs. 8.3 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.56; P < 0.001) and cEFR (29.0 vs. 8.3 months; HR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.57; P < 0.001). The confirmed CNS overall response rate in cEFR was 85.7% and 75.0% in patients treated with aumolertinib and gefitinib, respectively. Competing risk analysis showed that the estimated probability of CNS progression without prior non-CNS progression or death was consistently lower with aumolertinib than with gefitinib in patients with and without CNS metastases at baseline. No new safety findings were observed.
These results indicate a potential advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib in terms of CNS PFS and the risk of CNS progression in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC with baseline CNS metastases.
ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03849768.
初始随机、双盲、主动对照、III 期 ANEAS 研究(NCT03849768)表明,与吉非替尼相比,奥莫替尼作为表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变的晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的一线治疗具有更好的疗效。中枢神经系统(CNS)的转移性疾病仍然是 NSCLC 管理中的一个挑战。本研究旨在比较基线时有 CNS 转移的患者中奥莫替尼与吉非替尼的疗效。
符合条件的患者被招募并以 1:1 的比例随机分组,以双盲方式口服接受奥莫替尼或吉非替尼治疗。纳入有症状、稳定的 CNS 转移的患者。在最初的 CNS 影像学相同的模式下,每 6 周进行一次随访影像学检查,共 15 个月,然后每 12 周进行一次。通过神经放射学盲法、独立中心审查(神经放射学-BICR)评估 CNS 反应。该亚组分析的主要终点是 CNS 无进展生存期(PFS)。
在 ANEAS 研究中,429 名患者被纳入并随机分组,106 名患者经神经放射学-BICR 发现基线时有 CNS 转移(CNS 全分析集,cFAS),其中 60 名患者有 CNS 靶病灶(CNS 可评估反应,cEFR)。与吉非替尼相比,奥莫替尼治疗显著延长了 cFAS(29.0 与 8.3 个月;风险比[HR] = 0.31;95%置信区间[CI],0.17-0.56;P < 0.001)和 cEFR(29.0 与 8.3 个月;HR = 0.26;95%CI,0.11-0.57;P < 0.001)的中位 CNS PFS。在 cEFR 中,经确认的 CNS 总缓解率在接受奥莫替尼和吉非替尼治疗的患者中分别为 85.7%和 75.0%。竞争风险分析表明,在基线时有或没有 CNS 转移的患者中,与吉非替尼相比,奥莫替尼的 CNS 进展风险估计概率始终较低。未观察到新的安全性发现。
这些结果表明,在基线时有 CNS 转移的 EGFR 突变的晚期 NSCLC 患者中,与吉非替尼相比,奥莫替尼在 CNS PFS 和 CNS 进展风险方面可能具有优势。
ClinicalTrials.gov 编号,NCT03849768。