Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10668/11425
Title: | Symptom and Quality of Life Improvement in LUX-Lung 8, an Open-Label Phase III Study of Second-Line Afatinib Versus Erlotinib in Patients With Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung After First-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy. |
Authors: | Felip, Enriqueta Hirsh, Vera Popat, Sanjay Cobo, Manuel Fülöp, Andrea Dayen, Charles Trigo, José M Gregg, Richard Waller, Cornelius F Soria, Jean-Charles Goss, Glenwood D Gordon, James Wang, Bushi Palmer, Michael Ehrnrooth, Eva Gadgeel, Shirish M |
Keywords: | Cough;Diarrhea;Dyspnea;EGFR;Pain |
metadata.dc.subject.mesh: | Afatinib Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols Carcinoma, Squamous Cell Erlotinib Hydrochloride Female Humans Lung Neoplasms Male Middle Aged Neoplasm Staging Patient Reported Outcome Measures Platinum Compounds Quality of Life Survival Analysis |
Issue Date: | 23-Jun-2017 |
Abstract: | In the phase III LUX-Lung 8 trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus erlotinib in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung progressing during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (QoL) in these patients are presented. Patients (n = 795) were randomized 1:1 to oral afatinib (40 mg/d) or erlotinib (150 mg/d). PROs were collected (baseline, every 28 days until progression, 28 days after discontinuation) using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire and lung cancer-specific module. The percentage of patients improved during therapy, time to deterioration (TTD), and changes over time were analyzed for prespecified lung cancer-related symptoms and global health status (GHS)/QoL. Questionnaire compliance was 77.3% to 99.0% and 68.7% to 99.0% with afatinib and erlotinib, respectively. Significantly more patients who received afatinib versus erlotinib experienced improved scores for GHS/QoL (36% vs. 28%; P = .041) and cough (43% vs. 35%; P = .029). Afatinib significantly delayed TTD in dyspnea (P = .008) versus erlotinib, but not cough (P = .256) or pain (P = .869). Changes in mean scores favored afatinib for cough (P = .0022), dyspnea (P = .0007), pain (P = .0224), GHS/QoL (P = .0320), and all functional scales. Differences in adverse events between afatinib and erlotinib, specifically diarrhea, did not affect GHS/QoL. In patients with SCC of the lung, second-line afatinib was associated with improved prespecified disease-related symptoms and GHS/QoL versus erlotinib, complementing PFS and OS benefits with afatinib. |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10668/11425 |
metadata.dc.identifier.doi: | 10.1016/j.cllc.2017.06.002 |
Appears in Collections: | Producción 2020 |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
This item is protected by original copyright |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License