Pneumologie 2020; 74(S 01): 132-133
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3403364
Posterbegehung (PO25) – Sektion Pneumologische Onkologie
NSCLC: Systemtherapie bei molekularem Treiber
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Treatment patterns of EGFR mt+ NSCLC IV patients: Real world data of the NOWEL network

J Roeper
1   Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg; Pius Hospital; Universitätsklinik Innere Medizin – Onkologie
,
K Wedeken
2   Pius Hospital Oldenburg
,
U Stropiep
2   Pius Hospital Oldenburg
,
M Falk
3   Molekularpathologie, Institut für Hämatopathologie Hamburg
,
M Tiemann
4   Dres Tiemann & Schulte Partnerschaft; Institut for Hematopathology Hamburg
,
LC Heukamp
5   Institut für Hämatopathologie Hamburg; Hematopathology Institut Hamburg; Lung Cancer Network Nowel
,
C Wesseler
6   Lungenheilkunde (Pneumologie) im Thoraxzentrum, Asklepios Klinik Harburg
,
S Sackmann
7   Pneumologie, Klinikum Bremen-Ost gGmbH
,
F Griesinger
8   Department of Hematology and Oncology, Pius-Hospital Oldenburg, University Hospital
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
28 February 2020 (online)

Also available at
 

Introduction: The percentage of pts switching from 1st gen TKI in 1st line to 3rd gen TKI in 2nd line seems to be low with 30% and it is questionable whether these data represent real world treatments. Therefore, we investigated the treatment pattern and especially the attrition rate between 1st and 2nd line therapy in EGFR mt+ pts from the NOWEL network.

Methods: A retrospective study of 1539 pts with non-squamous NSCLC IV was accomplished. 965/1536 (63%) pts were tested for EGFR mt+ between 2009 – 2018. 148/965 (15%) pts with an EGFR mt+ were identified. To calculate PFS and OS we used Kaplan Meier methods and the log rang test for p-values.

Results: Baseline characteristics of 148 EGFR mt+ pts: median age 65 yrs; 64% female (n = 95/148); 64% never/light smoker (n = 94/148). 135/148 pts (91%) carried an EGFR mt+ either del19 (n = 81) or L858R (n = 55). 144/148 pts were treated with TKI on 1st or 2nd line (after chemotherapy) and 4 pts received no therapy at all. 14/144 pts are still on 1st line, 9 pts were lost to follow-up and 3 pts died while on 1st line therapy. We identified 118/144 candidates for 2nd line therapy (because of progression on 1st line TKI) and only 84/118 (70%) pts received a 2nd line therapy. 30% (36/118) of pts did not receive a 2nd line therapy because of bad PS (n = 26), pts refusal (n = 2), fast progression (n = 6) and death (n = 2). After accessibility of 3rd gen TKI 72 pts were candidates for 2nd line treatment and 51/71 pts (71%) received a 2nd line therapy. MOS of pts receiving 2nd line therapy after access to 3rd gen TKI was 35 mo for pts with 2nd line therapy vs. 10 mo without 2nd line (p < 0.000). 32/51 pts (63%) were tested for T790M and 20/32 (62%) were T790M+. Highest T790M testrate in one center was 22/28 (79%). 16/20 (80%) T790M+ pts received 3rd gen TKI for 2nd line therapy. MOS of pts receiving 3rd gen TKI (n = 31) was 51 mo vs. 25 mo for pts without 3rd gen TKI (p < 0.002).

Conclusion: In real world, a significant number of pts treated with 1st or 2nd gen TKI do not reach 2nd line therapy even with broad accessibility of 3rd gen TKI. Reasons for not receiving 2nd line therapy are in most cases deterioration of PS, death and no testing for T790M in a minority of cases. These data are important for the interpretation of the OS data of the FLAURA study as they reflect real world treatment algorithms in dedicated German lung cancer centers.