Amivantamab plus Chemotherapy in NSCLC with EGFR Exon 20 Insertions

Author(s): Caicun Zhou, M.D., Ph.D., Ke-Jing Tang, M.D., Ph.D., Byoung Chul Cho, M.D., Ph.D., Baogang Liu, M.D., Luis Paz-Ares, M.D., Ph.D., Susanna Cheng, M.D., Satoru Kitazono, M.D., Ph.D., Muthukkumaran Thiagarajan, M.D., Jonathan W. Goldman, M.D., Joshua K. Sabari, M.D., Rachel E. Sanborn, M.D., Aaron S. Mansfield, M.D., et al., for the PAPILLON Investigators*

Source: N Engl J Med 2023; 389:2039-2051 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2306441

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

Phase III study of amivantamab + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy in patients with Exon-20 EGFR mutations. While the results of this study are impressive, one wonders what the results would be if the comparator arm were a targeted option. This is not yet reflected in the NCCN guidelines but likely will be added.

BACKGROUND

Amivantamab has been approved for the treatment of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions who have had disease progression during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Phase 1 data showed the safety and antitumor activity of amivantamab plus carboplatin–pemetrexed (chemotherapy). Additional data on this combination therapy are needed.

METHODS

In this phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions who had not received previous systemic therapy to receive intravenous amivantamab plus chemotherapy (amivantamab–chemotherapy) or chemotherapy alone. The primary outcome was progression-free survival according to blinded independent central review. Patients in the chemotherapy group who had disease progression were allowed to cross over to receive amivantamab monotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 308 patients underwent randomization (153 to receive amivantamab–chemotherapy and 155 to receive chemotherapy alone). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab–chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 11.4 months and 6.7 months, respectively; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30 to 0.53; P<0.001). At 18 months, progression-free survival was reported in 31% of the patients in the amivantamab–chemotherapy group and in 3% in the chemotherapy group; a complete or partial response at data cutoff was reported in 73% and 47%, respectively (rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.68; P<0.001). In the interim overall survival analysis (33% maturity), the hazard ratio for death for amivantamab–chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.09; P=0.11). The predominant adverse events associated with amivantamab–chemotherapy were reversible hematologic and EGFR-related toxic effects; 7% of patients discontinued amivantamab owing to adverse reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of amivantamab–chemotherapy resulted in superior efficacy as compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; PAPILLON ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04538664. opens in new tab.)

Author Affiliations

From Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai (C.Z.), the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou (K.-J.T.), and Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin (B.L.) — all in China; the Division of Medical Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine (B.C.C.), Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (S. Kim), and Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine (K.P.) — all in Seoul, South Korea; Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid (L.P.-A.), and Vall d’Hebron University Hospital and Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology (E.F.) and Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau (M.M.), Barcelona — all in Spain; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto (S.C.); Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo (S. Kitazono), and Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka (A.O.) — both in Japan; General Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (M.T.); David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles (J.W.G.), and Janssen Research and Development, San Diego (S.M.S.) — both in California; NYU Langone Health, New York (J.K.S.); Earle A. Chiles Research Institute, Providence Cancer Institute of Oregon, Portland (R.E.S.); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (A.S.M.); the Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (J.-Y.H.); Chris O’Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia (M.B.); Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and the Institute of Cancer Research, London (S.P.), and Janssen Research and Development, High Wycombe (A.B.) — both in the United Kingdom; Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil (J.M.D.); Istanbul Medeniyet University, Prof. Dr. Suleyman Yalcin City Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey (M.G.); Janssen Research and Development, Raritan, NJ (J.X.); Janssen Research and Development, Spring House, PA (T.A., R.E.K.); and Institut Curie, Institut du Thorax Curie-Montsouris, Paris, and Paris Saclay University, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Versailles — both in France (N.G.).

Simultaneous Durvalumab and Platinum-Based Chemoradiotherapy in Unresectable Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Phase III PACIFIC-2 Study

PACIFIC-2 was a phase III trial testing durva given concurrently with cCRT (and continued as consolidation) versus placebo + cCRT in unresectable stage III NSCLC, and it did not meet its primary endpoint. The overall response rate (ORR) was essentially identical (60.7% vs 60.6%), and pneumonitis rates were similar (any grade 28.8% vs 28.7%; grade ≥3: 4.6% vs 5.6%), but adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation and fatal AEs were higher with durva (25.6% vs 12.0%; 13.7% vs 10.2%), especially early on. Starting IO up front with cCRT didn’t improve outcomes and added early toxicity—consolidation durva after cCRT is still the way to go.

Sevabertinib in Advanced HER2-Mutant Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Sevabertinib shows strong efficacy in HER2-mutant NSCLC, with an overall response rate (ORR) of 64% and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.3 months in previously treated, HER2-TKI–naive patients, and an overall response rate (ORR) of 71% with a duration of response (DOR) of 11.0 months in first-line therapy. Activity is highest in TKD mutations, especially Y772_A775dupYVMA, and intracranial responses are seen. Safety is manageable: diarrhea is common but mostly low grade, with grade ≥3 in 5–23% and rare discontinuations. Notably, interstitial lung disease (ILD) was not observed. These data position sevabertinib as a viable oral TKI alongside ADCs for HER2-mutant NSCLC, particularly for TKD/YVMA disease.

Overall Survival with Amivantamab–Lazertinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC

The combination therapy demonstrated improved overall survival (a 25% reduction in mortality) but was associated with increased toxicity, including skin rash and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Single-agent osimertinib may lose its role as monotherapy for EGFR-mutated NSCLC, as the FLAURA2 trial showed that combining osimertinib with chemotherapy yielded better outcomes than osimertinib alone.

Neoadjuvant Osimertinib for Resectable EGFR-Mutated Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

The phase III NeoADAURA trial evaluated neoadjuvant osimertinib (OSI) with or without platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) versus CT alone in resectable, EGFR-mutated stage II-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Both OSI+CT and OSI monotherapy significantly improved major pathologic response (MPR: 26% and 25% vs 2%), and 12-month event-free survival (EFS) rates were higher with OSI-containing regimens (OSI+CT 93%, OSI 95%, CT 83%). Nodal downstaging was also more frequent with OSI arms (53% vs 21%). Neoadjuvant OSI—with or without CT—looks like a real step forward for our EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients, especially given the robust pathologic responses and high rates of surgical completion.

Phase III Study of Mediastinal Lymph Node Dissection for Ground Glass Opacity–Dominant Lung Adenocarcinoma

This large, well-done study compared systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection (LND) versus no LND in patients with GGO-dominant invasive lung adenocarcinoma (CTR ≤0.5, ≤3 cm, cT1N0M0). Interim analysis of 302 patients showed no lymph node metastases in either arm, with both groups achieving 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of 100% at the time of analysis. The no LND arm had significantly shorter surgery duration (74 vs 109 min), less blood loss (44 vs 82 mL), shorter hospital stays (3.9 vs 4.5 days), and fewer grade ≥2 complications (3.3% vs 9.3%). Based on these findings, the trial was terminated early for nonmaleficence, and the authors recommend omitting systematic mediastinal LND in this population. In short, for carefully selected GGO-dominant lung adenocarcinoma, skipping mediastinal LND appears safe and spares patients’ unnecessary morbidity—this could be a real practice-changer for our early-stage, node-negative cases.