4CPS-298 Efficacy and safety profile of anti-EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

• Published in: European journal of hospital pharmacy. Science and practice 2021-03, Vol.28 (Suppl 1), p.A64-A64
• Main Authors: Cantarelli, L, Gutierrez Nicolas, F, Garcia Gil, S, Del Rosario Garcia, B, Nazco Casariego, GJ
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Conflicts of interest; Drug dosages; Lung cancer; Metastasis; Targeted cancer therapy
• ISSN: 2047-9956; 2047-9964
• DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-eahpconf.130

Background and importanceTyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are oral drugs that have demonstrated efficacy against metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with mutation of EGFR.Aim and objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety associated with TKI drugs in mNSCLC patients with the EGFR mutation.Material and methodsThis was a retrospective single centre study over 5 years and 7 months (January 2015 to July 2020) that included all patients with mNSCLC treated with the anti-EGFR TKI erlotinib (ERL), gefitinib (GEF), afatinib (AFA) and osimertinib (OSI). Variables corresponding to age, sex and mean duration of treatment were collected.The efficacy of the different treatments was determined, calculating progression free survival (PFS) applying the Kaplan–Meyer statistic, with SPSS V.15. Progression was analysed according to the radiological criteria response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST V.1.1). The occurrence of grade III/IV adverse effects (AEs) leading to a dose reduction/suspension of treatment was determined. The severity of these AEs was classified according to the common terminology criteria for adverse effects (CTCAE V.6.0).Results76 patients (51.3% women (n=39), mean age 70.3 years) were included in the study (47–90). 19.7% (n=15) received OSI, 32.9% ERL (n=25), 32.9% GEF (n=25) and 14.5% AFA (n=11). Mean duration of treatment was 11.2 months (0.2–63.3). Median PFS for each of the treatments was: OSI versus ERL (13.9 vs 5.3 months, p=0.66); OSI versus GEF (13.9 vs 10.5 months, p=0.63); OSI versus AFA (13.9 vs 3.9 months, p=0.56); GEF versus AFA (p=0.74); ERL versus GEF (p=0.94); and ERL versus AFA (p=0.84).34.2% of patients (n=26) had to reduce their dose/suspend treatment due to the appearance of AEs grade III/IV: OSI (13.3%, n=2), ERL (48%, n=12), GEF (24%, n=6) and AFA (63.6%, n=7). The most common AEs were: for OSI: thrombopenia (100%, n=2); for ERL: skin toxicity (n=4, 33.3%), gastrointestinal (GI) (n=5, 41.6%), haematological (n=3, 25%), renal (n=2, 16.6%), other (n=1, 8.3%); for AFA: skin toxicity (n=6, 85.7%), GI (n=1, 14,3%); and for GEF: skin toxicity (n=4, 66.7%), GI (n=1, 16.7%), other (n=1, 16.7%).Conclusion and relevanceThe study showed that there were no differences in PFS values between the different TKI anti-EGFR treatments for mNSCLC. In terms of safety, the best tolerated was osimertinib, with AEs appearing in only 13% of patients.References and/or acknowledgementsConflict of interestNo conflict of interest