Ji-Youn Han; Ki Hyeong Lee; Sang-We Kim; Young Joo Min; Eunkyung Cho; Youngjoo Lee; Soo-Hyun Lee; Hyae Young Kim; Geon Kook Lee; Byung Ho Nam; Hyesun Han; Jina Jung; Jin Soo Lee

doi:10.4143/crt.2016.058

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 49(1); 2017 > Article

Original Article A Phase II Study of Poziotinib in Patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma Who Have Acquired Resistance to EGFR–Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Ji-Youn Han, MD, PhD^1,, Ki Hyeong Lee, MD, PhD², Sang-We Kim, MD, PhD³, Young Joo Min, MD, PhD⁴, Eunkyung Cho, MD, PhD⁵, Youngjoo Lee, MD¹, Soo-Hyun Lee, MD¹, Hyae Young Kim, MD, PhD¹, Geon Kook Lee, MD, PhD¹, Byung Ho Nam, PhD¹, Hyesun Han, MS⁶, Jina Jung, PhD⁶, Jin Soo Lee, MD, PhD¹; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2017;49(1):10-19.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2016.058
Published online: May 3, 2016

¹Center for Lung Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea

²Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Cheongju, Korea

³Department of Internal Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

⁴Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, Ulsan, Korea

⁵Department of Internal Medicine, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea

⁶Clinical Research Team, Hanmi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Ji-Youn Han, MD, PhD Center for Lung Cancer, National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang 10408, Korea
Tel: 82-31-920-1154 Fax: 82-31-920-2799 E-mail: jymama@ncc.re.kr

• Received: February 8, 2016 • Accepted: April 17, 2016

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

14,530 Views
563 Download
37 Web of Science
35 Crossref
38 Scopus

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract

Purpose
We examined the efficacy of poziotinib, a second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in patients with lung adenocarcinoma with activating EGFR mutations, who developed acquired resistance (AR) to EGFR-TKIs.
Materials and Methods
This single-arm phase II study included EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma with AR to erlotinib or gefitinib based on the Jackman criteria. Patients received poziotinib 16 mg orally once daily in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Prestudy tumor biopsies and blood samples were obtained to determine resistance mechanisms.
Results
Thirty-nine patients were treated. Tumor genotyping was determined in 37 patients; 19 EGFR T790M mutations and two PIK3CA mutations were detected in the prestudy tumors, and seven T790M mutations were detected in the plasma assay. Three (8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2 to 21) and 17 (44%; 95% CI, 28 to 60) patients had partial response and stable disease, respectively. The median PFS and overall survival were 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 3.7) and 15.0 months (95% CI, 9.5 to not estimable), respectively. A longer PFS was observed for patients without T790M or PIK3CA mutations in tumor or plasma compared to those with these mutations (5.5 months vs. 1.8 months, p=0.003). The most frequent grade 3 adverse events were rash (59%), mucosal inflammation (26%), and stomatitis (18%). Most patients required one (n=15) or two (n=15) dose reductions.
Conclusion
Low activity of poziotinib was detected in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer who developed AR to gefitinib or erlotinib, potentially because of severe-toxicityimposed dose limitation.
Key words: Epidermal growth factor receptor, Poziotinib, Non-small-cell lung carcinoma, T790M, PIK3CA

Introduction

Compared with standard chemotherapy, significant improvement in response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) has been reported for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) including gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1-3]. EGFR-TKIs are now the treatment of choice for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC. However, despite the initial response to EGFR-TKIs, most patients develop resistance and finally relapse. Among several mechanisms responsible for acquired resistance (AR) to EGFR-TKIs, the secondary EGFR T790M point mutation in exon 20 is the most common, occurring in approximately 60% of patients. Other mechanisms include MET, HER2, or EGFR amplification; histologic transformation to small cell lung cancer [4]; epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition signature [5]; and AXL kinase activation [6]. Coexistence of other mutations including PIK3CA, HER2, or BRAF mutations also contributes to the development of AR to EGFR-TKIs [7,8].

Poziotinib (NOV120101) is an oral, irreversible inhibitor of EGFR, HER2, and HER4. In preclinical studies conducted in cell lines and xenograft models of NSCLC, poziotinib showed more potent activity than gefitinib, erlotinib, and even afatinib in lung cancer models with EGFR mutations including T790M mutation [9]. In a phase I study to examine the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of continuous daily dosing of poziotinib in genetically unselected patients with advanced solid cancers including NSCLC, 20% of patients (4/20) experienced partial response (PR), with an MTD of 18 mg and an acceptable toxicity profile, supporting further clinical development of poziotinib. The recommended phase II dose was 16 mg/day [10]. This phase II open-label, single-arm study was conducted to examine the anticancer activity and safety of poziotinib in patients with advanced or metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with activating EGFR mutations, who developed AR to EGFR-TKIs based on the Jackman criteria [11].

Materials and Methods

1. Patients

This phase II, open-label, single-arm study enrolled patients aged ≥ 20 years with histopathologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma from five institutions in Korea. Eligible patients had at least one measurable lesion or, if not measurable, an evaluable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) ver. 1.1 and documented activating EGFR mutations. Patients had received erlotinib or gefitinib as first-line or subsequentline therapy from which they achieved a best overall response of complete response (CR), PR, or stable disease (SD; at least ≥ 6 months) and progressed within the last 30 days. Patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 with a life expectancy of ≥ 12 weeks; consented to providing tumor tissue samples; and had a white blood cell count of ≥ 4,000/mm³, platelet count ≥ 100,000/mm³, serum creatinine and total bilirubin level ≤ 1.5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN), and serum aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase level ≤ 2.5 times the ULN.

The exclusion criteria were as follows: patients with unresolved adverse events (AEs) from erlotinib or gefitinib (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade ≥ 2); resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib secondary to transformation to small-cell lung cancer; major surgery or anticancer therapy other than gefitinib and erlotinib within 4 weeks of the start of the study treatment; untreated symptomatic brain metastasis; interstitial lung disease; active infection; cardiovascular disease or condition including New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, uncontrolled hypertension, unstable angina pectoris, or myocardial infarction within 6 months of the study start, uncontrolled cardiac arrhythmia, or other clinically relevant abnormalities; resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than the lower normal limit defined by the institution; any gastrointestinal disease or condition having the prominent symptom of diarrhea; a history of malignancy except for treated non-melanomatous skin cancer, in situ cervix carcinoma, or ductal in situ breast carcinoma; and patients who were pregnant, lactating, or using inadequate contraception.

2. Treatment and procedures

Poziotinib was administered orally, consecutively, and once daily in 28-day cycles with a starting dose of 16 mg until progressive disease (PD) or intolerable AEs. For patients who experienced drug-related AEs, treatment with poziotinib was interrupted until the AEs were resolved to CTCAE grade ≤ 1 or baseline level. The treatment was resumed at the previous dose or a reduced dose by 4 mg, and if a dose reduction below 8 mg consecutively once daily was required, the regimen was changed to intermittent dosing (i.e., 2 weeks of 8-mg poziotinib treatment followed by 1 week off treatment). Further dose reduction or up-titration after the reduction was not allowed. Treatment with poziotinib was discontinued permanently in patients requiring a dose reduction below 8-mg intermittent dosing, had not recovered to AEs of CTCAE grade ≤ 1 or baseline level within 2 weeks, had pneumonia or LVEF reduction of CTCAE grade ≥ 3, or had interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis of any grade. Supportive care including anti-diarrhea medication, antibiotics, analgesics, and antiemetics as well as treatments for diseases other than lung adenocarcinoma was allowed, and local palliative radiotherapy to improve symptoms such as bone pain, pulmonary occlusion, and skin lesions was also allowed.

Tumors were assessed by spiral computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (except for the chest) at baseline (imaging at the time PD from previous EGFR-TKIs was confirmed and could be used if obtained within 2 weeks prior to baseline), week 4, week 8, and every 8 weeks thereafter until PD or the start of new anticancer therapy. After discontinuation of treatment, patients were followed-up every 3 months until death or the start of new anticancer therapy. Scans were reviewed both locally and centrally. Tumor response assessments were based on RECIST ver. 1.1. Tumor tissue samples were mandatory at screening from all patients enrolled (except for those with available tumor tissue collected within 2 weeks of the study start) and optional after PD. Blood samples for genotyping were obtained from patients at screening, cycle 3, and every two cycles thereafter until the end of treatment. Safety assessments were performed at least every cycle using CTCAE ver. 4.0.

The study was approved by the ethics committee of each study institution and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, and all patients provided written informed consent.

3. Study outcomes

The primary endpoint of the study was PFS by independent review. The secondary endpoints included PFS rate at week 16, objective response rate (ORR; CR+PR), disease control rate (DCR; objective response+SD), overall survival (OS), duration of objective response, and duration of disease control. PFS was calculated from the start of treatment to PD or death, whichever occurred first, or was censored at the last imaging date in the absence of PD or death. OS was calculated from the start of treatment to death or was censored at the last date of contact if the patient was alive. Safety assessments included treatment-related AEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, radiography, electrocardiogram (ECG), and LVEF by a multi-gated acquisition scan or echocardiogram.

4. Prestudy tumor tissue analysis

DNA extraction and mutation analysis of prestudy tumor samples were performed in a central laboratory (Theragen Etex, Suwon, Korea). Mutational status was analyzed by Ion Torrent deep-amplicon sequencing using an Ion Torrent AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot customized lung cancer panel (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA). Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) of MET (c-MET Probe KBI-10719, Kreatech, LG Amsterdam, Netherlands), EGFR, and HER2 was performed on available tumor tissues using the standard protocol [7,12], and MET expression status was also analyzed using immunohistochemistry (IHC) (clone SP44, Ventana, Tucson, AZ). Tumors with a staining-intensity score of 3 and with more than 50% positive nuclei were considered to have MET overexpression.

5. Plasma sample analysis

Circulating cell-free DNA was extracted from 200 μL of plasma samples using the QIAamp MinElute virus spin kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The purity and concentration of extracted DNA were determined by spectrophotometry (NanoDrop 2000, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.). DNA samples with absorption ratios of 260/280 nm greater than 1.8 were used for subsequent analyses. For plasma samples, only T790M mutation was analyzed using the PANAMutyper R EGFR kit (Panagene, Daejeon, Korea), a new highly sensitive mutation detection kit that uses a peptide nucleic acid clamping–assisted fluorescence melting curve analysis method in mutation detection and genotyping.

6. Statistical analysis

The sample size (n=40) was selected to provide at least 34 patients with PFS event considering 15% of follow-up loss with the following assumption: in a 12-month period of patient enrollment, a total of 34 PFS events in the study would have a 90% power for detection of a 1.8-month improvement of median PFS with poziotinib versus historical control where the conventional anticancer chemotherapies had been implemented (median PFS, 4.5 months vs. 2.7 months for poziotinib and historical control [13,14], respectively), with a one-sided significance level of 5%. The primary endpoint, median PFS, and the secondary endpoints including median OS, time to progression, time to objective response, duration of objective response, and duration of disease control were calculated from Kaplan-Meier estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI). For other secondary endpoints including PFS rate at 16 weeks, ORR, and DCR, the number and proportion of patients was calculated with 95% CIs. Statistical analysis for subgroups based on mutational status was performed using log-rank, Fisher exact, or Pearson’s chi-square tests depending on the types of variables. Efficacy assessments were performed in the full analysis set consisting of patients who received at least one dose of poziotinib with at least one evaluation of the primary efficacy endpoint after baseline. Safety data was summarized descriptively in patients who received at least one dose of poziotinib.

Results

1. Patient characteristics and disposition

Forty patients were enrolled between December 2012 and September 2013. Thirty-nine patients received at least one dose of poziotinib with at least one tumor assessment after baseline and were included in the full analysis set and safety set. One patient who did not receive the study drug was withdrawn from the study and excluded from the data analysis. Demographics and baseline characteristics of patients are shown in Table 1. The median age was 62 years (range, 43 to 84 years), and the majority of patients were women (74%) and never-smokers (77%). All patients had stage IV disease. Most patients received gefitinib or erlotinib as first-line (69%) or second-line (28%) therapy with a median treatment duration of 10.4 months (range, 3.4 to 33.2 months). The best response to previous EGFR-TKIs was predominantly PR (92%). At the time of data cut-off (September 1, 2014), all patients in the full analysis set, except for one who achieved PR with poziotinib, discontinued treatment for the following reasons: lack of efficacy or PD (n=28), voluntary withdrawal of consent (n=7), AEs (n=2), or other reason (n=1).

2. Efficacy assessments

A summary of the efficacy measures for poziotinib by independent review is shown in Table 2. The median PFS at the time of analysis (January 7, 2015) was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 3.7), and the PFS rate was 35% at week 16 (95% CI, 20 to 51). The best response changes from baseline in tumor lesions were evaluated in 35 patients with measurable lesions at baseline (Fig. 1). Three patients achieved PR (ORR, 8%; 95% CI, 2 to 21). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median duration of objective response was 4.5 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 4.6), and the DCR was 51% (95% CI, 35 to 68). At the data cut-off, 20 OS events were reported. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median OS was 15.0 months (95% CI, 9.5 to not estimable).

3. The possible mechanism of AR to EGFR-TKIs

Of 39 patients who received poziotinib, mutational status in prestudy tumor tissues was determined in 37 patients (Fig. 2A), but not in two patients because of inadequate tissue samples. All tumor samples were reviewed by a thoracic pathologist (G.K.L.). Among the 37 patients, 19 (51%) had T790M mutation and two (5%) had PIK3CA mutations, and one patient had EGFR wild type.

Four patients donated tumor tissue at the end of treatment, and all were T790M-positive at screening and at the end of treatment.

To further elucidate the mechanisms of AR, plasma EGFR T790M genotyping was performed in all patients (n=39), which identified seven additional cases of T790M mutation, which were not detected in tumor tissue samples. The performance of plasma T790M genotyping is summarized in Supplementary Table 1.

Sufficient tumor tissue was available from 35 patients for MET, EGFR, and HER2 FISH analysis. Among three patients with EGFR amplifications, two overlapped with EGFR T790M mutation. No MET or HER2 amplification was detected. Of 35 patients tested using IHC, five patients had MET overexpression and four overlapped with EGFR T790M mutation. The frequencies of possible AR mechanisms are shown in Fig. 2B. Overall, of 39 patients, 26 patients (67%) developed AR to prior EGFR-TKIs due to acquisition of T790M mutation.

4. Clinical outcome according to mutational status

In subgroup analysis on the EGFR T790M mutational status in the prestudy tumor tissue, the estimated median PFS in patients with EGFR T790M mutation (2.7 months; 95% CI, 1.7 to 3.9) was shorter than that for patients without T790M mutation (3.7 months; 95% CI, 1.4 to 5.4; p=0.329) (Supplementary Fig. S1A). Similarly, patients with the EGFR T790M or PIK3CA mutations in prestudy tumor tissue had a shorter median PFS (1.9 months; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.6) than those without these mutations (3.7 months; 95% CI, 1.7 to 5.5; p=0.103) (Supplementary Fig. S1B). However, these differences were not statistically significant.

Regarding the EGFR T790M mutation in baseline plasma samples, a significantly shorter median PFS (1.8 months; 95% CI, 1.7 to 1.9) was observed for patients with EGFR T790M mutations than for those without these mutations (3.7 months; 95% CI, 3.5 to 3.8; p=0.006) (Supplementary Fig. S1C). When combining the mutation results in tumor and plasma, a more prominent difference in PFS was observed. Patients with T790M or PIK3CA mutation (1.8 months; 95% CI, 1.7 to 1.9) had significantly shorter estimated median PFS than those without these mutations (5.5 months; 95% CI, 3.1 to 7.8; p=0.003) (Supplementary Fig. S1D).

5. Safety and tolerability

Patients remained on poziotinib for a median of 58 days (range, 17 to 443 days); 23% of patients (9/39) continued poziotinib without dose reduction throughout the treatment and others (77%) required at least one dose reduction; 15 (38%) required one dose reduction, and 15 (38%) required two dose reductions.

All patients treated with poziotinib experienced at least one treatment-related AE; the most frequently reported AEs (≥ 30% of patients) included diarrhea, rash, pruritus, stomatitis, paronychia, decreased appetite, mucosal inflammation, dry skin, and fatigue (Table 3). The most frequently reported grade 3 AEs (reported in 95% of patients) were rash, mucosal inflammation, stomatitis, decreased appetite, dermatitis acneiform, diarrhea, and hypokalemia. Overall, 17 serious adverse events were reported in eight patients (21%), with diarrhea being the most frequent (4/39; 10%) followed by stomatitis and rash (2/39; 5%, each). Rash was the most common reason for dose reduction (17/39; 44%) and dose interruption (9/39; 23%). Two events (one myositis and one rash) resulted in permanent discontinuation and there was no treatment-related death. Poziotinib was not considered to be related to any significant changes in laboratory tests, vital signs, or other safety endpoints (including chest radiography, ECG, and LVEF).

Discussion

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of poziotinib, a pan-EGFR-TKI, in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who developed AR to gefitinib or erlotinib. Patients enrolled in this trial were required to meet the eligibility criteria based on Jackman’s clinical definition of AR to EGFR-TKIs in NSCLC [10]. Similar to other reports, T790M mutation was the most common cause of AR. Other mechanisms included PIK3CA mutation, EGFR amplification, or MET overexpression. In this heterogeneous patient population, overall ORR was 8% and DCR was 51%. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median PFS (2.7 months) did not reach the extent of the original assumption used for calculation of the sample size (4.5 months). However, patients without T790M mutation had better median PFS than those with T790M mutation. These results suggest that poziotinib may not overcome AR secondary to T790M mutation. In addition, when combining the results of patients with or without T790M or PIK3CA mutations in tissue or plasma, patients without these mutations had significantly longer PFS than those with these mutations (5.5 months vs. 1.8 months, p=0.003), which exceeds the primary endpoint results of this study. This finding suggests that poziotinib may not overcome AR due to EGFR T790M or PIK3CA mutation. However, it can be considered as a new treatment option for patients who develop AR not due to these mutations.

As an irreversible EGFR-TKI, poziotinib has shown in vitro activity for EGFR T790M mutant NSCLC cells. Several irreversible EGFR-TKIs including afatinib, dacomitinib, and neratinib have been evaluated in patients previously treated with gefitinib or erlotinib, yielding a response rate of less than 10% and PFS of less than 4 months [15-17]. Despite their preclinical activity against T790M mutation, these drugs failed to demonstrate adequate efficacy in these populations. In addition, their potent wild type EGFR-inhibiting activity leads to intolerable skin and gastrointestinal toxicities, and poziotinib was associated with serious skin rash and diarrhea. Finally, most patients required frequent dose reduction, which may further decrease the potential for inhibiting T790M mutation.

Recent progress has been made in the treatment of EGFR T790M mutant NSCLC with mutant-selective EGFR-TKIs including AZD9291, rociletinib, and HM61713. Response rates of over 50% have been reported in patients with T790M mutation. In addition, compared with other EGFR-TKIs developed so far, these drugs have more favorable toxicity profiles [18-20]. Thus, these mutant-selective EGFR-TKIs would be a promising treatment option for patients with EGFR T790M mutant NSCLC.

Molecular analysis at the time of progression on EGFR-TKI therapy is important in deciding on the next treatment plan. Tumor tissue is the preferred sample type when available; however, there is increasing evidence that plasma can be used as a substitute for molecular analysis in NSCLC [21]. In this study, we also examined the utility of plasma samples for EGFR T790M mutation analysis. EGFR T790M mutation rates were higher in tumor tissue (19/37, 51% in evaluable samples) than in plasma (18/39, 46%). The concordance was 62%, with a specificity of 67% and sensitivity of 58% (Supplementary Table 1). Despite the low concordance rate observed here, the plasma T790M results were more predictive for efficacy compared with tissue results (Supplementary Fig. S1C), and five out of six patients with T790M-positive plasma but T790M-negative tissue showed PD with poziotinib. Thus, further clinical evaluation of the plasma assay is required.

Conclusion

In this explorative phase II study poziotinib provided modest clinical benefit in patients with advanced or metastatic lung adenocarcinoma having progressed on erlotinib or gefitinib. This study provided no obvious clinical evidence showing that poziotinib may overcome AR secondary to EGFR T790M mutation.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary materials are available at Cancer Research and Treatment website (http://www.e-crt.org).

crt-2016-058-supple.pdf

NOTES

Hyesun Han and Jina Jung are fulltime employees of the Hanmi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Seoul, South Korea.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by National OncoVenture and Hanmi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (NCT01718847).

Fig. 1.

Best response changes from baseline in tumor lesions: blue (partial response, PR), red (stable disease, SD), and green (progressive disease, PD).

Fig. 2.

(A) Mutational status in the prestudy tumor tissues. (B) Possible mechanism of acquired resistance to prior epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Table 1.

Patient demographics and baseline characteristics

Characteristic	No. (%)
Age, median (range, yr)	62 (43-84)
Sex
Male	10 (26)
Female	29 (74)
Smoking status
Never	30 (77)
Former	9 (23)
Current	0
Smoking pack year, median (range)	22 (17-28)
ECOG PS
0	6 (15)
1	30 (77)
2	3 (78)
Therapy line of previous EGFR-TKI
First	27 (69)
Second	11 (28)
Third	0
Fourth	1 (3)
Duration of previous EGFR-TKI, median (range, mo)	13.1 (3.4-33.2)
Best response to previous EGFR-TKI
Complete response	0
Partial response	36 (92)
Stable disease	3 (8)

ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Table 2.

Response to treatment with poziotinib by independent review

Variable	Total (n=39)
PFS events, n (%)	34 (87)
Estimated PFS, median (95% CI, mo)	2.7 (1.8-3.7)
PFS events at week 16, n (%)	24 (62)
Estimated PFS at week 16 (95% CI, %)	35 (20-51)
Deaths, n (%)	20 (51)
Estimated OS, median (95% CI, mo)	15.0 (9.5-NE)
Best response, n (%)
CR	0
PR	3 (8)
SD	17 (44)
PD	18 (46)
Not evaluable	1 (3)
ORR (95% CI, %)	8 (2-21)
DCR (95% CI, %)	51 (35-68)
Estimated duration of response, median (95% CI, mo)	4.5 (3.7-4.6)
Estimated duration of disease control, median (95% CI, mo)	3.7 (1.8-3.8)

PFS, progression-free survival; CI, confidence interval; OS, overall survival; NE, not estimable; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; ORR, objective response rate; DCR, disease control rate.

Table 3.

TEAEs by CTCAE grade reported in ≥ 5% of patients

Preferred term	Any grade	Grade 1	Grade 2	Grade 3
No. of patients	39 (100)	39 (100)	39 (100)	39 (100)
Total with adverse events	39 (100)	39 (100)	37 (95)	37 (95)
Diarrhoea	36 (92)	30 (77)	17 (44)	4 (10)
Rash	30 (77)	14 (36)	17 (44)	23 (59)
Pruritus	25 (64)	10 (26)	17 (44)	2 (5)
Stomatitis	23 (59)	11 (28)	13 (33)	7 (18)
Paronychia	21 (54)	8 (21)	13 (33)	2 (5)
Decreased appetite	19 (49)	12 (31)	8 (21)	5 (13)
Mucosal inflammation	18 (46)	8 (21)	9 (23)	10 (26)
Dry skin	15 (38)	8 (21)	7 (18)	1 (3)
Fatigue	12 (31)	7 (18)	7 (18)	1 (3)
Dyspepsia	8 (21)	6 (15)	2 (5)	0
Hypokalaemia	7 (18)	2 (5)	2 (5)	4 (10)
Alopecia	6 (15)	6 (15)	0	0
Dermatitis acneiform	5 (13)	2 (5)	0	4 (10)
Weight decreased	5 (13)	3 (8)	2 (5)	1 (3)
Skin exfoliation	4 (10)	3 (8)	1 (3)	0
Palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome	3 (8)	1 (3)	2 (5)	1 (3)
Dysphagia	3 (8)	1 (3)	2 (5)	0
Nausea	3 (8)	2 (5)	1 (3)	0
Pneumothorax	3 (8)	3 (8)	0	0
Muscular weakness	3 (8)	0	3 (8)	0
Hirsutism	2 (5)	2 (5)	0	0
Pain of skin	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Petechiae	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Vomiting	2 (5)	1 (3)	0	1 (3)
Abdominal pain upper	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Asthenia	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Conjunctivitis	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	1 (3)
Nail infection	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Blood creatinine increased	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Rhinorrhoea	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Eye discharge	2 (5)	2 (5)	1 (3)	0
Dysuria	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Anaemia	2 (5)	0	1 (3)	1 (3)

Values are presented as number (%). No grade 4 or 5 events were reported. TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

REFERENCES

1. Maemondo M, Inoue A, Kobayashi K, Sugawara S, Oizumi S, Isobe H, et al. Gefitinib or chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2380–8. Article PubMed
2. Zhou C, Wu YL, Chen G, Feng J, Liu XQ, Wang C, et al. Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:735–42. Article PubMed
3. Yang JC, Shih JY, Su WC, Hsia TC, Tsai CM, Ou SH, et al. Afatinib for patients with lung adenocarcinoma and epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (LUX-Lung 2): a phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:539–48. Article PubMed
4. Sequist LV, Waltman BA, Dias-Santagata D, Digumarthy S, Turke AB, Fidias P, et al. Genotypic and histological evolution of lung cancers acquiring resistance to EGFR inhibitors. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:75ra26.Article PubMed PMC
5. Suda K, Tomizawa K, Fujii M, Murakami H, Osada H, Maehara Y, et al. Epithelial to mesenchymal transition in an epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant lung cancer cell line with acquired resistance to erlotinib. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:1152–61. Article PubMed
6. Zhang Z, Lee JC, Lin L, Olivas V, Au V, LaFramboise T, et al. Activation of the AXL kinase causes resistance to EGFR-targeted therapy in lung cancer. Nat Genet. 2012;44:852–60. Article PubMed PMC
7. Yu HA, Arcila ME, Rekhtman N, Sima CS, Zakowski MF, Pao W, et al. Analysis of tumor specimens at the time of acquired resistance to EGFR-TKI therapy in 155 patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:2240–7. Article PubMed PMC
8. Ohashi K, Sequist LV, Arcila ME, Moran T, Chmielecki J, Lin YL, et al. Lung cancers with acquired resistance to EGFR inhibitors occasionally harbor BRAF gene mutations but lack mutations in KRAS, NRAS, or MEK1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:E2127–33. Article PubMed PMC
9. Cha MY, Lee KO, Kim M, Song JY, Lee KH, Park J, et al. Antitumor activity of HM781-36B, a highly effective pan-HER inhibitor in erlotinib-resistant NSCLC and other EGFR-dependent cancer models. Int J Cancer. 2012;130:2445–54. Article PubMed
10. Kim YJ, Oh J, Kim TM, Han SW, Lee KW, Kim JH, et al. Phase I study to evaluate the safety and to assess the food effect of HM781-36B, a novel pan-HER inhibitor continuously given in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(Suppl):Abstr 2565.Article
11. Jackman D, Pao W, Riely GJ, Engelman JA, Kris MG, Janne PA, et al. Clinical definition of acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:357–60. Article PubMed PMC
12. Sequist LV, Martins RG, Spigel D, Grunberg SM, Spira A, Janne PA, et al. First-line gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring somatic EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2442–9. Article PubMed
13. Kim ES, Hirsh V, Mok T, Socinski MA, Gervais R, Wu YL, et al. Gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (INTEREST): a randomised phase III trial. Lancet. 2008;372:1809–18. Article PubMed
14. Gridelli C, Ciardiello F, Gallo C, Feld R, Butts C, Gebbia V, et al. First-line erlotinib followed by second-line cisplatin-gemcitabine chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the TORCH randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3002–11. Article PubMed
15. Sequist LV, Besse B, Lynch TJ, Miller VA, Wong KK, Gitlitz B, et al. Neratinib, an irreversible pan-ErbB receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor: results of a phase II trial in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3076–83. Article PubMed
16. Miller VA, Hirsh V, Cadranel J, Chen YM, Park K, Kim SW, et al. Afatinib versus placebo for patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer after failure of erlotinib, gefitinib, or both, and one or two lines of chemotherapy (LUX-Lung 1): a phase 2b/3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:528–38. Article PubMed
17. Ellis PM, Shepherd FA, Millward M, Perrone F, Seymour L, Liu G, et al. Dacomitinib compared with placebo in pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NCIC CTG BR.26): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1379–88. Article PubMed
18. Janne PA, Yang JC, Kim DW, Planchard D, Ohe Y, Ramalingam SS, et al. AZD9291 in EGFR inhibitor-resistant non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1689–99. Article PubMed
19. Sequist LV, Soria JC, Goldman JW, Wakelee HA, Gadgeel SM, Varga A, et al. Rociletinib in EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1700–9. Article PubMed
20. Tan CS, Cho BC, Soo RA. Next-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2016;93:59–68. Article PubMed
21. Douillard JY, Ostoros G, Cobo M, Ciuleanu T, McCormack R, Webster A, et al. First-line gefitinib in Caucasian EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients: a phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:55–62. Article PubMed PMC

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Repeat biopsy versus initial biopsy in terms of complication risk factors and clinical outcomes for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a comparative study of 113 CT-guided needle biopsy of lung lesions
Yangyang Wang, Yongyuan Zhang, Nana Ren, Fangting Li, Lin Lu, Xin Zhao, Zhigang Zhou, Mengyu Gao, Meng Wang
Frontiers in Oncology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
EGFR-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Retreatment in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Previously Exposed to EGFR-TKI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Isabella Michelon, Maysa Vilbert, Caio Ernesto do Rego Castro, Carlos Stecca, Maria Inez Dacoregio, Manglio Rizzo, Vladmir Cláudio Cordeiro de Lima, Ludimila Cavalcante
Journal of Personalized Medicine.2024; 14(7): 752. CrossRef
3D bioprinted vascularized lung cancer organoid models with underlying disease capable of more precise drug evaluation
Yoo-mi Choi, Haram Lee, Minjun Ann, Minyeong Song, Jinguen Rheey, Jinah Jang
Biofabrication.2023; 15(3): 034104. CrossRef
Association of Hypokalemia Incidence and Better Treatment Response in NSCLC Patients: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review on Anti-EGFR Targeted Therapy Clinical Trials
Jiawei Zhou, Jianling Bai, Yuanping Yue, Xin Chen, Theis Lange, Dongfang You, Yang Zhao
Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Anlotinib plus chemotherapy for T790M‐negative EGFR‐mutant non‐sqNSCLC resistant to TKIs: A multicenter phase 1b/2 trial
Juan Li, Yuke Tian, Min Zheng, Jun Ge, Jiliang Zhang, Dejun Kong, Mei Chen, Ping Yu
Thoracic Cancer.2022; 13(24): 3496. CrossRef
Computational Insights into the Potential of Withaferin-A, Withanone and Caffeic Acid Phenethyl Ester for Treatment of Aberrant-EGFR Driven Lung Cancers
Vidhi Malik, Vipul Kumar, Sunil C. Kaul, Renu Wadhwa, Durai Sundar
Biomolecules.2021; 11(2): 160. CrossRef
Validation of a multicellular tumor microenvironment system for modeling patient tumor biology and drug response
Devin G. Roller, Stephen A. Hoang, Kristopher D. Rawls, Katherine A. Owen, Michael B. Simmers, Robert A. Figler, Julia D. Wulfkuhle, Emanuel F. Petricoin, Brian R. Wamhoff, Daniel Gioeli
Scientific Reports.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced diarrhea: clinical incidence, toxicological mechanism, and management
Gabriel Tao, Pavan Kumar Chityala
Toxicology Research.2021; 10(3): 476. CrossRef
Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a Prognostic Factor for Mortality in Elderly Patients with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injuries
Wei-Ti Su, Ching-Hua Tsai, Chun-Ying Huang, Sheng-En Chou, Chi Li, Shiun-Yuan Hsu, Ching-Hua Hsieh
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy.2021; Volume 14: 2465. CrossRef
Geriatric nutritional risk index in screening malnutrition among young adult and elderly trauma patients
Yueh-Wei Liu, Ching-Hua Tsai, Sheng-En Chou, Wei-Ti Su, Chi Li, Shiun-Yuan Hsu, Ching-Hua Hsieh
Formosan Journal of Surgery.2021; 54(5): 183. CrossRef
In silico studies on p21-activated kinase 4 inhibitors: comprehensive application of 3D-QSAR analysis, molecular docking, molecular dynamics simulations, and MM-GBSA calculation
Yinli Gao, Hanxun Wang, Jian Wang, Maosheng Cheng
Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics.2020; 38(14): 4119. CrossRef
Novel drugs targeting EGFR and HER2 exon 20 mutations in metastatic NSCLC
Iosune Baraibar, Laura Mezquita, Ignacio Gil-Bazo, David Planchard
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology.2020; 148: 102906. CrossRef
Overcoming trastuzumab resistance in HER2‐positive breast cancer using combination therapy
Afshin Derakhshani, Zohreh Rezaei, Hossein Safarpour, Morteza Sabri, Atefeh Mir, Mohammad Amin Sanati, Fatemeh Vahidian, Ali Gholamiyan Moghadam, Ali Aghadoukht, Khalil Hajiasgharzadeh, Behzad Baradaran
Journal of Cellular Physiology.2020; 235(4): 3142. CrossRef
Toward a More Precise Future for Oncology
Yonina R. Murciano-Goroff, Barry S. Taylor, David M. Hyman, Alison M. Schram
Cancer Cell.2020; 37(4): 431. CrossRef
Nanocarrier centered therapeutic approaches: Recent developments with insight towards the future in the management of lung cancer
Jigar D. Vanza, Rashmin B. Patel, Mrunali R. Patel
Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology.2020; 60: 102070. CrossRef
Poziotinib Inhibits the Efflux Activity of the ABCB1 and ABCG2 Transporters and the Expression of the ABCG2 Transporter Protein in Multidrug Resistant Colon Cancer Cells
Yongchao Zhang, Zhuo-Xun Wu, Yuqi Yang, Jing-Quan Wang, Jun Li, Zoey Sun, Qiu-Xu Teng, Charles R. Ashby, Dong-Hua Yang
Cancers.2020; 12(11): 3249. CrossRef
Prolonged Central Nervous System Response in a Patient With HER2 Mutant NSCLC Treated With First-Line Poziotinib
Nishan Tchekmedyian, Bill Paxton, Francois Lebel, Lena Keossayan, John V. Heymach
JTO Clinical and Research Reports.2020; 1(4): 100081. CrossRef
Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a Screening Tool to Identify Patients with Malnutrition at a High Risk of In-Hospital Mortality among Elderly Patients with Femoral Fractures—A Retrospective Study in a Level I Trauma Center
Wei-Ti Su, Shao-Chun Wu, Chun-Ying Huang, Sheng-En Chou, Ching-Hua Tsai, Chi Li, Shiun-Yuan Hsu, Ching-Hua Hsieh
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(23): 8920. CrossRef
Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index as a Tool to Evaluate Impact of Malnutrition Risk on Mortality in Adult Patients with Polytrauma
Cheng-Hsi Yeh, Shao-Chun Wu, Sheng-En Chou, Wei-Ti Su, Ching-Hua Tsai, Chi Li, Shiun-Yuan Hsu, Ching-Hua Hsieh
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(24): 9233. CrossRef
Association between Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index and Mortality in Older Trauma Patients in the Intensive Care Unit
Hang-Tsung Liu, Shao-Chun Wu, Ching-Hua Tsai, Chi Li, Sheng-En Chou, Wei-Ti Su, Shiun-Yuan Hsu, Ching-Hua Hsieh
Nutrients.2020; 12(12): 3861. CrossRef
Safety and Tolerability of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Oncology
Rashmi R. Shah, Devron R. Shah
Drug Safety.2019; 42(2): 181. CrossRef
Receptor tyrosine kinases in PI3K signaling: The therapeutic targets in cancer
Wei Jiang, Meiju Ji
Seminars in Cancer Biology.2019; 59: 3. CrossRef
Clinical Impact of Rare and Compound Mutations of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Juliane Martin, Annika Lehmann, Frederick Klauschen, Michael Hummel, Dido Lenze, Christian Grohé, Antje Tessmer, Joachim Gottschalk, Berndt Schmidt, Hans-Wilhelm Pau, Christian Witt, Stefan Moegling, Robert Kromminga, Korinna Jöhrens
Clinical Lung Cancer.2019; 20(5): 350. CrossRef
Metastasiertes Lungenkarzinom – therapierbare molekulare Alterationen
W. M. Brückl, J. H. Ficker
Der Pneumologe.2019; 16(6): 343. CrossRef
Successful Treatment of a Miliary Metastatic NSCLC Patient With Activating EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutation with Response to Poziotinib
Juyin Yang, Jian Yang, Shao Ban, Xinmin Li, Xingde Chen, Jihua Yang, Jun Qian
Journal of Thoracic Oncology.2019; 14(9): e198. CrossRef
Targeting Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Non-Small-Cell-Lung Cancer: Current State and Future Perspective
Shui-Ming Bao, Qing-Hui Hu, Wen-Ting Yang, Yao Wang, Yin-Ping Tong, Wen-Dai Bao
Anti-Cancer Agents in Medicinal Chemistry.2019; 19(8): 984. CrossRef
Maximum allele frequency observed in plasma: A potential indicator of liquid biopsy sensitivity
Yong Tang, Xianling Liu, Zhu'an Ou, Zhe He, Qihang Zhu, Ye Wang, Mei Yang, Junyi Ye, Han Han‑Zhang, Guibin Qiao
Oncology Letters.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
TAS6417/CLN-081 Is a Pan-Mutation–Selective EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor with a Broad Spectrum of Preclinical Activity against Clinically Relevant EGFR Mutations
Hibiki Udagawa, Shinichi Hasako, Akihiro Ohashi, Rumi Fujioka, Yumi Hakozaki, Mikiko Shibuya, Naomi Abe, Toshiharu Komori, Tomonori Haruma, Miki Terasaka, Ryoto Fujita, Akihiro Hashimoto, Kaoru Funabashi, Hiroyuki Yasuda, Kazutaka Miyadera, Koichi Goto, D
Molecular Cancer Research.2019; 17(11): 2233. CrossRef
Preclinical characterization of anlotinib, a highly potent and selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor‐2 inhibitor
Chengying Xie, Xiaozhe Wan, Haitian Quan, Mingyue Zheng, Li Fu, Yun Li, Liguang Lou
Cancer Science.2018; 109(4): 1207. CrossRef
Mechanisms and clinical activity of an EGFR and HER2 exon 20–selective kinase inhibitor in non–small cell lung cancer
Jacqulyne P. Robichaux, Yasir Y. Elamin, Zhi Tan, Brett W. Carter, Shuxing Zhang, Shengwu Liu, Shuai Li, Ting Chen, Alissa Poteete, Adriana Estrada-Bernal, Anh T. Le, Anna Truini, Monique B. Nilsson, Huiying Sun, Emily Roarty, Sarah B. Goldberg, Julie R.
Nature Medicine.2018; 24(5): 638. CrossRef
Clinical Activity of Pan-HER Inhibitors Against HER2-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma
In-Jae Oh, Jae Young Hur, Cheol-Kyu Park, Young-Chul Kim, Seung Joon Kim, Min Ki Lee, Hee Joung Kim, Kye Young Lee, Jae Cheol Lee, Chang-Min Choi
Clinical Lung Cancer.2018; 19(5): e775. CrossRef
Update review of skin adverse events during treatment of lung cancer and colorectal carcinoma with epidermal growth receptor factor inhibitors
Yanmei Peng, Qiang Li, Jingyi Zhang, Wen Shen, Xu Zhang, Chenyao Sun, Huijuan Cui
BioScience Trends.2018; 12(6): 537. CrossRef
EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations Display Sensitivity to Hsp90 Inhibition in Preclinical Models and Lung Adenocarcinomas
Susan E. Jorge, Antonio R. Lucena-Araujo, Hiroyuki Yasuda, Zofia Piotrowska, Geoffrey R. Oxnard, Deepa Rangachari, Mark S. Huberman, Lecia V. Sequist, Susumu S. Kobayashi, Daniel B. Costa
Clinical Cancer Research.2018; 24(24): 6548. CrossRef
EGFR T790M ctDNA testing platforms and their role as companion diagnostics: Correlation with clinical outcomes to EGFR-TKIs
Zhiyong Liang, Ying Cheng, Yuan Chen, Yanping Hu, Wei-Ping Liu, You Lu, Jie Wang, Ye Wang, Gang Wu, Jian-Ming Ying, He-Long Zhang, Xu-Chao Zhang, Yi-Long Wu
Cancer Letters.2017; 403: 186. CrossRef
Comparison of cross-platform technologies for EGFR T790M testing in patients with non-small cell lung cancer
Xuefei Li, Caicun Zhou
Oncotarget.2017; 8(59): 100801. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

A Phase II Study of Poziotinib in Patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma Who Have Acquired Resistance to EGFR–Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Cancer Res Treat. 2017;49(1):10-19. Published online May 3, 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2016.058

XML Download

Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Electronic Supplementary Material
NOTES
REFERENCES

Real-World Study of Osimertinib in Korean Patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor T790M Mutation–Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

A Phase II Study of Poziotinib in Patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma Who Have Acquired Resistance to EGFR–Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Fig. 1. Best response changes from baseline in tumor lesions: blue (partial response, PR), red (stable disease, SD), and green (progressive disease, PD).

Fig. 2. (A) Mutational status in the prestudy tumor tissues. (B) Possible mechanism of acquired resistance to prior epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

A Phase II Study of Poziotinib in Patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma Who Have Acquired Resistance to EGFR–Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Characteristic	No. (%)
Age, median (range, yr)	62 (43-84)
Sex
Male	10 (26)
Female	29 (74)
Smoking status
Never	30 (77)
Former	9 (23)
Current	0
Smoking pack year, median (range)	22 (17-28)
ECOG PS
0	6 (15)
1	30 (77)
2	3 (78)
Therapy line of previous EGFR-TKI
First	27 (69)
Second	11 (28)
Third	0
Fourth	1 (3)
Duration of previous EGFR-TKI, median (range, mo)	13.1 (3.4-33.2)
Best response to previous EGFR-TKI
Complete response	0
Partial response	36 (92)
Stable disease	3 (8)

Variable	Total (n=39)
PFS events, n (%)	34 (87)
Estimated PFS, median (95% CI, mo)	2.7 (1.8-3.7)
PFS events at week 16, n (%)	24 (62)
Estimated PFS at week 16 (95% CI, %)	35 (20-51)
Deaths, n (%)	20 (51)
Estimated OS, median (95% CI, mo)	15.0 (9.5-NE)
Best response, n (%)
CR	0
PR	3 (8)
SD	17 (44)
PD	18 (46)
Not evaluable	1 (3)
ORR (95% CI, %)	8 (2-21)
DCR (95% CI, %)	51 (35-68)
Estimated duration of response, median (95% CI, mo)	4.5 (3.7-4.6)
Estimated duration of disease control, median (95% CI, mo)	3.7 (1.8-3.8)

Preferred term	Any grade	Grade 1	Grade 2	Grade 3
No. of patients	39 (100)	39 (100)	39 (100)	39 (100)
Total with adverse events	39 (100)	39 (100)	37 (95)	37 (95)
Diarrhoea	36 (92)	30 (77)	17 (44)	4 (10)
Rash	30 (77)	14 (36)	17 (44)	23 (59)
Pruritus	25 (64)	10 (26)	17 (44)	2 (5)
Stomatitis	23 (59)	11 (28)	13 (33)	7 (18)
Paronychia	21 (54)	8 (21)	13 (33)	2 (5)
Decreased appetite	19 (49)	12 (31)	8 (21)	5 (13)
Mucosal inflammation	18 (46)	8 (21)	9 (23)	10 (26)
Dry skin	15 (38)	8 (21)	7 (18)	1 (3)
Fatigue	12 (31)	7 (18)	7 (18)	1 (3)
Dyspepsia	8 (21)	6 (15)	2 (5)	0
Hypokalaemia	7 (18)	2 (5)	2 (5)	4 (10)
Alopecia	6 (15)	6 (15)	0	0
Dermatitis acneiform	5 (13)	2 (5)	0	4 (10)
Weight decreased	5 (13)	3 (8)	2 (5)	1 (3)
Skin exfoliation	4 (10)	3 (8)	1 (3)	0
Palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome	3 (8)	1 (3)	2 (5)	1 (3)
Dysphagia	3 (8)	1 (3)	2 (5)	0
Nausea	3 (8)	2 (5)	1 (3)	0
Pneumothorax	3 (8)	3 (8)	0	0
Muscular weakness	3 (8)	0	3 (8)	0
Hirsutism	2 (5)	2 (5)	0	0
Pain of skin	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Petechiae	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Vomiting	2 (5)	1 (3)	0	1 (3)
Abdominal pain upper	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Asthenia	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Conjunctivitis	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	1 (3)
Nail infection	2 (5)	0	2 (5)	0
Blood creatinine increased	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Rhinorrhoea	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Eye discharge	2 (5)	2 (5)	1 (3)	0
Dysuria	2 (5)	1 (3)	1 (3)	0
Anaemia	2 (5)	0	1 (3)	1 (3)

Table 1. Patient demographics and baseline characteristics

ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Table 2. Response to treatment with poziotinib by independent review

Table 3. TEAEs by CTCAE grade reported in ≥ 5% of patients

Values are presented as number (%). No grade 4 or 5 events were reported. TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event; CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.