Stage IIIA NSCLC represents a relatively heterogeneous group of pts with ipsilateral mediastinal (N2) lymph node involvement. The relative roles of treatment modalities are not clearly defined. Concurrent chemoradiation therapy remains an important treatment for stage IIIA disease, but its treatment-related life threatening toxicity limits its use. The EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) may provide a dramatic response in pts with pulmonary adenocarcinoma carrying EGFR activating mutations in the metastatic setting. In the OPTIMAL study, first-line erlotinib versus carboplatin/GEM in advanced NSCLC pts with EGFR activating mutations, the primary analysis showed significantly prolonged progressive free survival (PFS) was with erlotinib vs carboplatin/GEM (p\<0.0001). The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of erlotinib versus GEM plus cisplatin (GC) as neoadjuvant treatment in pts with stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC with EGFR activating mutations and to explore a new treatment strategy for this subset.
Concurrent Chemoradiation therapy remain the standard treatment for stage IIIA disease, but its treatment-related life threaten toxicity limit its use for those pts. Tarceva monotherapy have been demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival and disease progression free survival when used for the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC, after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. It is well tolerated without the side effects usually associated with chemotherapy. Based on the encouraging results reported from the SLCG phase II study reported the efficacy of Tarceva as first line treatment for metastatic NSCLC with EGFR mutation patients would prolong overall survival, delay disease progression and be well tolerated, mOS reached 27 months, ORR reached 71%. Besides, with different mechanism and more tolerable than chemo, Tarceva may provide an important treatment alternative for local advanced pts with EGFR mutation. In IPASS study (gefitinib or carboplatin/paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma as first line treatment), the subgroup of 261 patients who were positive for the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received gefitinib than among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.64; P\<0.001). In OPTIMAL study (first-line erlotinib versus carboplatin/gemcitabine in Chinese advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR activating mutations), the primary analysis showed PFS was significantly prolonged with erlotinib vs carboplatin/paclitaxel(13.1months vs 4.6 months, HR 0.16 ; p\<0.0001). The objective response rate was significantly improved with erlotinib vs carboplatin/paclitaxel (83% vs 36%, p=0.0000), as was the disease control rate (CR + PR + SD; 96 vs 82%; p=0.002). The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of Tarceva versus combination of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with stage IIIA- N2 NSCLC with EGFR activating mutation in exon 19 or 21.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
72
In the neo-adjuvant treatment phase, erlotinib 150 mg/day taken orally for 6 weeks(42 days).In the post-surgery phase, erlotinib 150mg/day taken orally for 1 year or till disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
In the neo-adjuvant treatment phase, patient will receive gemcitabine 1250mg/m2 IV on day 1 and day 8, and cisplatin 75mg/m2 on day 1 of a 3-week schedule for 2 cycles. In the post-surgery phase, Gemcitabine 1250mg/m2 IV on day 1 and day 8, and cisplatin 75mg/m2 on day 1 of a 3-week schedule for 2 cycles or till disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
Guangdong General Hospital
Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
The objective response rate (ORR) in neoadjuvant treatment
To evaluate objective response rate (ORR) of Erlotinib versus combination of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin as neoadjuvant treatment for stage IIIA- N2 NSCLC with EGFR activating mutation in exon 19 or 21.
Time frame: Tumor response will be evaluated after 6 weeks of induction treatment (during day 43 to day 49).
Complete resection rate
To evaluate radical resection rate of two groups.
Time frame: The patients considered to be technically resectable will undergo resection. Lymph node downstage rate is depended on the pathology dignosis after surgery, an expected average of 8 weeks from randomization.
Pathological complete response (pCR) rate
To evaluate the pathological complete response (pCR) rate of two groups.
Time frame: The patients considered to be technically resectable will undergo resection. Lymph node downstage rate is depended on the pathology dignosis after surgery, an expected average of 8 weeks from randomization.
Progression free survival(PFS)
To evaluate Progressive Free Survival (PFS) of two groups.
Time frame: Pts after surgery will receive long-term follow-up including chest CT scan, abdominal ultrasound every 3 months, brain MRI every 6 months, bone scan (ECT) every 12 months for up to 2 years.
3 year overall survival (OS) rate
To evaluate the 3 year overall survival (OS) rate of two groups.The third year after surgery is survival follow-up.
Time frame: Pts after surgery will receive long-term follow-up including chest CT scan, abdominal ultrasound every 3 months, brain MRI every 6 months, bone scan (ECT) every 12 months for up to 2 years.
Number of Participants with Adverse Events
To evaluate the safety profile(Number of Participants with Adverse Events) of two group.
Time frame: During the neoadjuvant and adjuvant period, an expected average of 1 years from randomization.
Quality of Life (QOL)
To evaluate the Quality of Life (QOL) of two group
Time frame: During the neo-adjuvant treatment phase(1-42 days), surgery treatment phase and adjuvant phase, , an expected average of 1 years from randomization.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.