We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Randomized phase 2 trial of erlotinib in combination with high-dose celecoxib or placebo in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Cancer 2015 September 16
BACKGROUND: Cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2)-dependent signaling represents a potential mechanism of resistance to therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors. This is mediated in part through an EGFR-independent activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (Erk) by prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). PGE2 promotes downregulation of E cadherin and epithelial to mesenchymal transition. The current study investigated EGFR and COX-2 inhibition in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and elevated baseline urinary metabolite of PGE2 (PGEM).
METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV (AJCC 6th edition) NSCLC who progressed after at least 1 line of therapy or refused standard chemotherapy were randomized to receive erlotinib and celecoxib versus erlotinib and placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with 80% power to detect a 50% improvement with a 1-sided significance level of .2 in the intent-to-treat and elevated baseline PGEM populations. Secondary endpoints included response rate, overall survival, and evaluation of molecular markers to assess targeting COX-2-related pathways and evaluate EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance.
RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were enrolled with comparable baseline characteristics. Among the patients treated with celecoxib, those with wild-type EGFR were found to have an increased PFS (3.2 months vs 1.8 months; P = .03). PFS was numerically improved among patients in the intent-to-treat group who received erlotinib and celecoxib compared with those treated with erlotinib and placebo (5.4 months vs 3.5 months; P = .33) and was increased in patients in the erlotinib and celecoxib arm with elevated baseline PGEM (5.4 months vs 2.2 months; P = .15). Adverse events were similar in both treatment arms.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of erlotinib and celecoxib did not appear to improve outcomes in an unselected population, but selection by elevated baseline PGEM led to an increase in PFS with this combination. Patients with EGFR wild-type status may benefit from the combination of erlotinib and celecoxib.
METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV (AJCC 6th edition) NSCLC who progressed after at least 1 line of therapy or refused standard chemotherapy were randomized to receive erlotinib and celecoxib versus erlotinib and placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with 80% power to detect a 50% improvement with a 1-sided significance level of .2 in the intent-to-treat and elevated baseline PGEM populations. Secondary endpoints included response rate, overall survival, and evaluation of molecular markers to assess targeting COX-2-related pathways and evaluate EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance.
RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were enrolled with comparable baseline characteristics. Among the patients treated with celecoxib, those with wild-type EGFR were found to have an increased PFS (3.2 months vs 1.8 months; P = .03). PFS was numerically improved among patients in the intent-to-treat group who received erlotinib and celecoxib compared with those treated with erlotinib and placebo (5.4 months vs 3.5 months; P = .33) and was increased in patients in the erlotinib and celecoxib arm with elevated baseline PGEM (5.4 months vs 2.2 months; P = .15). Adverse events were similar in both treatment arms.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of erlotinib and celecoxib did not appear to improve outcomes in an unselected population, but selection by elevated baseline PGEM led to an increase in PFS with this combination. Patients with EGFR wild-type status may benefit from the combination of erlotinib and celecoxib.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Haemodynamic monitoring during noncardiac surgery: past, present, and future.Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2024 April 31
2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Circulation 2024 May 9
Obesity pharmacotherapy in older adults: a narrative review of evidence.International Journal of Obesity 2024 May 7
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app