Although Osimertinib in another trial (article from a previous month) had also impressive response first-line osimertinib initiation of 25 days. In total, 136 previously untreated brain metastases were tracked from baseline. Overall, 105 lesions (77.2%) had complete response and 31 had partial response reflecting best objective response of 100%.
Patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC have a high incidence of brain metastases. The EGFR-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib has intracranial activity, making the role of local central nervous system (CNS)-directed therapies, such as radiation and surgery, less clear.
Patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and brain metastases who received osimertinib as initial therapy after brain metastasis diagnosis were included. Individual lesion responses were assessed using adapted RANO-BM criteria. CNS progression and local progression of brain metastasis from osimertinib start were analyzed using cumulative incidence treating death as a competing risk. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology.
There were 36 patients who had a median interval from brain metastasis diagnosis to first-line osimertinib initiation of 25 days. In total, 136 previously untreated brain metastases were tracked from baseline. Overall, 105 lesions (77.2%) had complete response and 31 had partial response reflecting best objective response of 100%. Best response occurred at a median of 96 days (range: 28–1113 d) from baseline magnetic resonance imaging. This reflects a best objective response rate of 100%. Two-year overall survival was 80%. CNS progression rates at 1-, 2-, and 3-years post-osimertinib were 21%, 32%, and 41%, respectively. Lesion-level local failure was estimated to be 0.7% and 4.7% at 1- and 2-years post-osimertinib, respectively. No clinicodemographic factors including brain metastasis number were associated with post-osimertinib progression.
Intracranial response to osimertinib is excellent for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC with de novo, previously untreated brain metastases. Very low local failure rates support a strategy of upfront osimertinib alone in selected patients.
Superior to osi (23 vs 16 progression-free survival). This is more toxic though, but seems manageable. Could this be a new first line standard of care? Also, this includes brain penetration data.
Adding SBRT improves local control and disease progression in the brain but not overall survival. Do the radiation oncologists have input? Is it worth it to control symptoms?
Neoadjuvant Osimertinib did not have a significant impact on major pathologic response and there were no ypCR’s after a median of ~8 weeks of therapy. I do think this shows a measurable response, enough such that I would consider Osi in a patient with “borderline resectable” disease.
Bispecific (a bispecific antibody targeting programmed cell death 1 protein and vascular endothelial growth factor) and chemotherapy … and it worked … second line after EGFR therapy failure.
Osimertinib in adjuvant, now after chemotherapy and radiation, next… Neoadjuvant??? Trials are ongoing.
This is here till progression.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
