TY - JOUR
T1 - Phase 3 Trial Comparing Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel With Docetaxel for Previously Treated Advanced NSCLC
AU - Yoneshima, Yasuto
AU - Morita, Satoshi
AU - Ando, Masahiko
AU - Nakamura, Atsushi
AU - Iwasawa, Shunichiro
AU - Yoshioka, Hiroshige
AU - Goto, Yasuhiro
AU - Takeshita, Masafumi
AU - Harada, Toshiyuki
AU - Hirano, Katsuya
AU - Oguri, Tetsuya
AU - Kondo, Masashi
AU - Miura, Satoru
AU - Hosomi, Yukio
AU - Kato, Terufumi
AU - Kubo, Toshio
AU - Kishimoto, Junji
AU - Yamamoto, Nobuyuki
AU - Nakanishi, Yoichi
AU - Okamoto, Isamu
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd , and in part by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (26-A-22, 29-A-3, 2020-A-13). We thank the participating patients and their families and the investigators and institutions involved in this study. We also thank members of the Center for Clinical and Translational Research at Kyushu University Hospital for their contribution to this clinical trial.
Funding Information:
Disclosure: Dr. Yoneshima reports receiving a grant from Taiho during the conduct of the study and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceuticals, and Chugai Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Morita reports receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Taiho Pharmaceuticals, and Ono Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Ando reports receiving a grant from Kyowa Kirin. Dr. Nakamura reports receiving personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Kyowa Kirin, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Taiho Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Iwasawa reports receiving a grant from Ono Pharmaceuticals and personal fees from Ono Pharmaceuticals and AstraZeneca. Dr. Yoshioka reports receiving personal fees from Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Kyowa Kirin, Daiichi Sankyo, Delta-Fly, and Nippon Kayaku. Dr. Hirano reports receiving personal fees from Taiho Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Oguri reports receiving a grant from Boehringer Ingelheim and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Taiho, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr. Kondo reports receiving a grant and personal fees from Eli Lilly and personal fees from Chugai Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Takeda. Dr. Miura reports receiving personal fees from Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr. Hosomi reports receiving personal fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Kirin, and CSL Behring. Dr. Kato reports receiving grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Merck Biopharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, and Taiho; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche, Nippon Kayaku, Nitto Denko, Shionogi, Sumitomo Dainippon, and Takeda; and grants from Astellas, Kyorin, Kyowa Kirin, and Regeneron. Dr. Kubo reports receiving personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Taiho, Kyowa Kirin, AstraZeneca, Ono, Nippon Kayaku, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Yamamoto reports receiving grants and personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Pfizer; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Life Technologies, Nippon Kayaku, and Merck Biopharma; and grants from Astellas, Tsumura, Shionogi, AbbVie, Amgen, Kyorin, Eisai, Terumo, Toppan Printing, and Tosho. Dr. Okamoto reports receiving grants from Taiho during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Eli Lilly, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Chugai Pharmaceuticals; personal fees from Pfizer; and a grant from AbbVie. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.This work was supported by Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd, and in part by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (26-A-22, 29-A-3, 2020-A-13). We thank the participating patients and their families and the investigators and institutions involved in this study. We also thank members of the Center for Clinical and Translational Research at Kyushu University Hospital for their contribution to this clinical trial.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab-) paclitaxel for previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: In this randomized, open-label, noninferiority phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive docetaxel (60 mg/m2) on day 1 or nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results: Between May 22, 2015, and March 12, 2018, a total of 503 patients were randomly allocated to the treatment. Median OS was 16.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.4–19.0) for the 252 patients allocated to nab-paclitaxel and 13.6 months (95% CI: 10.9–16.5) for the 251 patients allocated to docetaxel (hazard ratio = 0.85, 95.2% CI: 0.68–1.07). Median progression-free survival was 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.9–5.0) for the nab-paclitaxel group versus 3.4 months (95% CI: 2.9–4.1) for the docetaxel group (hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63–0.92, p = 0.0042). The objective response rate was 29.9% (95% CI: 24.0–36.2) for the nab-paclitaxel group and 15.4% (95% CI: 10.9–20.7) for the docetaxel group (p = 0.0002). Adverse events of grade greater than or equal to 3 included febrile neutropenia (5 of 245 patients [2%] in the nab-paclitaxel group versus 55 of 249 patients [22%] in the docetaxel group) and peripheral sensory neuropathy (24 [10%] versus 2 [1%], respectively). Conclusions: Nab-paclitaxel was noninferior to docetaxel in terms of OS. It should, thus, be considered a standard treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC.
AB - Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab-) paclitaxel for previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: In this randomized, open-label, noninferiority phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive docetaxel (60 mg/m2) on day 1 or nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results: Between May 22, 2015, and March 12, 2018, a total of 503 patients were randomly allocated to the treatment. Median OS was 16.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.4–19.0) for the 252 patients allocated to nab-paclitaxel and 13.6 months (95% CI: 10.9–16.5) for the 251 patients allocated to docetaxel (hazard ratio = 0.85, 95.2% CI: 0.68–1.07). Median progression-free survival was 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.9–5.0) for the nab-paclitaxel group versus 3.4 months (95% CI: 2.9–4.1) for the docetaxel group (hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63–0.92, p = 0.0042). The objective response rate was 29.9% (95% CI: 24.0–36.2) for the nab-paclitaxel group and 15.4% (95% CI: 10.9–20.7) for the docetaxel group (p = 0.0002). Adverse events of grade greater than or equal to 3 included febrile neutropenia (5 of 245 patients [2%] in the nab-paclitaxel group versus 55 of 249 patients [22%] in the docetaxel group) and peripheral sensory neuropathy (24 [10%] versus 2 [1%], respectively). Conclusions: Nab-paclitaxel was noninferior to docetaxel in terms of OS. It should, thus, be considered a standard treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106351440&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85106351440&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.03.027
DO - 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.03.027
M3 - Article
C2 - 33915251
AN - SCOPUS:85106351440
SN - 1556-0864
VL - 16
SP - 1523
EP - 1532
JO - Journal of Thoracic Oncology
JF - Journal of Thoracic Oncology
IS - 9
ER -