This website is an international information resource intended for international healthcare professionals outside the United States of America (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) who are interested in information about Boehringer Ingelheim oncology.
While the Internet serves a global community, the pharmaceutical industry is subject to country-specific regulatory considerations. This means that compound status or the registration status and approved product labels of Afatinib or Nintedanib may not be the same in different countries.
Information about approved products on this website is derived from the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) for Afatinib and Nintedanib in the EU. It is not country-specific and may vary from the approved label in the country where you are located. Please refer to your local Prescribing Information for full details.
By clicking on the link below you are declaring and confirming that you are a healthcare professional outside the United States of America and the United Kingdom and have read and understood this disclaimer.
A Phase III Trial of Afatinib vs Erlotinib for the Treatment of Squamous Cell Lung Cancer After at Least One Prior Platinum-Based Chemotherapy
A randomised, open-label, Phase III trial of afatinib* vs erlotinib in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) of the lung as second-line therapy following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.
Trial CT.gov-Identifier: NCT01523587
Stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) of squamous histology
Completed at least four cycles of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment
No prior treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) directed small molecules or antibodies
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1
Primary Outcome Measure:
Key Secondary Outcome Measure:
Other Secondary Outcome Measures:
Median PFS was 2.6 months in patients receiving afatinib compared with 1.9 months in patients receiving erlotinib (p=0.0103).
OS was significantly improved with afatinib vs erlotinib (p=0.0077).
ORR and tumour shrinkage were significantly better in patients receiving afatinib vs erlotinib. In addition, duration of response was 7.3 months for afatinib and 3.7 months for erlotinib.
Adverse event (AE) profiles were similar with both treatments and 57% of patients in each group had Grade ≥3 AEs. The most common AEs were diarrhoea, rash/acne, fatigue and stomatitis in the afatinib group, and rash/acne, diarrhoea, fatigue and pruritus in the erlotinib group. Treatment-related Grade 3 diarrhoea and stomatitis were higher with afatinib than with erlotinib (10% vs 2% and 4% vs 0%, respectively), while Grade 3 rash/acne was higher with erlotinib than with afatinib (10% vs 6%). The safety profile of afatinib was similar in long-term responders (patients treated for ≥12 months), with no discontinuations due to AEs.
Patients receiving afatinib had significantly improved overall HRQoL compared with those receiving erlotinib (36% vs 28%, p=0.04).
No tumour biomarkers have been identified that are predictive of a clinical outcome with afatinib or erlotinib for treatment of SqCC of the lung. In the Lux-Lung 8 study, an exploratory biomarker analysis tested the predictive ability of VeriStrat®, a proprietary serum protein test that has previously shown prognostic and predictive utility for EGFR-targeted agents in NSCLC. Patients were stratified by VeriStrat® classification of ‘good’ (VS-G) or ‘poor’ (VS-P). In patients with relapsed/refractory SqCC of the lung afatinib conferred significantly longer OS compared with erlotinib in the VS-G group (11.5 vs 8.9 months; hazard ratio [HR]=0.79 [95% confidence interval (Cl): 0.63–0.98], p<0.0001). In afatinib treated patients OS was significantly improved in the VS-G group compared with the VS-P group (11.5 vs 4.7 months; HR=0.40 [95% Cl: 0.31–0.51], p<0.0001). The patients classified as VS-G were nearly four times as likely to survive ≥12 months.
Afatinib has clinical efficacy as second-line treatment for patients with SqCC of the lung. Afatinib reduced the risk of death compared with erlotinib and also improved PFS, HRQoL and symptom control.
Afatinib has now been approved for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC of squamous histology progressing on or after platinum-based chemotherapy (country dependent: US after platinum-based chemotherapy; EU on or after platinum-based chemotherapy).
Soria JC, et al. Lancet Oncol 2015;16(8):897–907.
Gadgeel S, et al. Lung Cancer 2017;109:101–8.
Felip E, et al. J Thorac Oncol 2017;12(Suppl):S1086–S1087 (Abstract #P3.02b-003).
Clinicaltrials.gov. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01523587 (Accessed: July 2017).
*Afatinib is approved in more than 70 markets including the EU, Japan, Taiwan, and Canada under the brand name GIOTRIF®, in the US under the brand name GILOTRIF® and in India under the brand name Xovoltib®; for the full list please see here. Registration conditions differ internationally; please refer to locally approved prescribing information.
Using this link will let you leave a website of Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH (“BI”) or to a different domain under the control of BI. In the event that the linked site is not under the control of BI but under the control of a third party or an affiliate in the Boehringer Ingelheim group of companies, BI shall not be responsible for the contents, processing of personal data of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. This link is provided to you only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by BI of the site.
Do you want to continue ?Continue