Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27825638›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2016

Erlotinib, cabozantinib, or erlotinib plus cabozantinib as second-line or third-line treatment of patients with EGFR wild-type advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ECOG-ACRIN 1512): a randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

Joel W Neal, Suzanne E Dahlberg, Heather A Wakelee, Seena C Aisner, Michaela Bowden, Ying Huang, David P Carbone, Gregory J Gerstner, Rachel E Lerner, Jerome L Rubin and 6 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01708954 (A Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib, Cabozantinib, or Erlotinib Plus Cabozantinib as 2nd or 3rd Line Therapy in Patients With EGFR Wild-Type NSCLC), which is not on this map. Cited by 78 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01708954 phase2active not recruitingnot on this map

A Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib, Cabozantinib, or Erlotinib Plus Cabozantinib as 2nd or 3rd Line Therapy in Patients With EGFR Wild-Type NSCLC

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Ran2013 to 2027Enrolled125ConditionsRecurrent Lung Non-Small Cell Carcinoma, Stage IV Lung Non-Small Cell Cancer AJCC v7ArmsCabozantinib S-malate, Erlotinib Hydrochloride, Laboratory Biomarker Analysis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Joel W NealStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA, USA. Electronic address: jwneal@stanford.edu.
Suzanne E DahlbergDana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Heather A WakeleeStanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA, USA.
Seena C AisnerRutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, USA.
Michaela BowdenDana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Ying HuangDana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
David P CarboneThe Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Gregory J GerstnerIllinois CancerCare-Peoria, Peoria, IL, USA.
Rachel E LernerPark Nicollet Clinic, Saint Louis Park, MN, USA.
Jerome L RubinCommunity Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, Monterey, CA, USA.
Taofeek K OwonikokoThe Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Philip J StellaSaint Joseph Mercy Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Preston D SteenRoger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND, USA.
Ahmed Ali KhalidCharleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, WV, USA.
Suresh S RamalingamThe Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
ECOG-ACRIN 1512 Investigators
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute · USCancer Prevention Institute of California · USEmory University · USCharleston Area Medical Center · USFargo VA Health Care System · USIllinois CancerCare · USMonterey Peninsula College · USPark Nicollet Clinic · USRutgers Cancer Institute of New JerseyThe Ohio State University · USTrinity Health Ann Arbor Hospital · US

Funding

Project-006U10CA180820 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer · 2014 to 2026
$167.6M
ECOG OPERATIONS OFFICE (IBCSG)U10CA021115 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON · PI COMIS, ROBERT L · 1985 to 2013
$132.6M
Statistics CoreU10CA180794 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI PAUL J CATALANO · 2014 to 2026
$111.2M
Children's Oncology Group Statistics &Data Center GrantU10CA098413 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI DEVIDAS, MEENAKSHI · 2003 to 2013
$67.5M
Metro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium (MMCORC)UG1CA189863 · NCI · PARK NICOLLET INSTITUTE · PI JOLEEN M HUBBARD, Yan Ji · 2014 to 2026
$43.2M
ECOG-ACRIN Biospecimen Bank to Support NCTNU24CA196172 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI STANLEY R. HAMILTON, Scott D Jewell · 2015 to 2026
$41.1M
Heartland Cancer Research NCORPUG1CA189830 · NCI · DECATUR MEMORIAL HOSPITAL · PI Bryan A. Faller · 2014 to 2026
$40.9M
ECOG Statistical Office Data Management GrantU10CA066636 · NCI · FRONTIER SCI &TECHNOLOGY RSCH FDN, INC · PI GRAY, ROBERT J · 1994 to 2013
$39.5M
Michigan Cancer Research Consortium NCORPUG1CA189971 · NCI · SAINT JOSEPH MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM · PI Tareq Al baghdadi · 2014 to 2026
$36.6M
PROVIDE STATISTICAL SERVICESU10CA023318 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI GRAY, ROBERT J · 1985 to 2013
$33.4M
W METRO-MINNEAPOLIS COMMUNITY CLINICAL ONCOLOGY PROGRAMU10CA035267 · NCI · PARK NICOLLET INSTITUTE · PI LEACH, JOSEPH · 1985 to 2014
$23.2M
MICHIGAN CANCER RESEARCH CONSORTIUM CCOPU10CA063848 · NCI · SAINT JOSEPH MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM · PI STELLA, PHILIP J · 1994 to 2014
$17.2M
CCR NIH HHS HHSN261200800001CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261200800001ENCI NIH HHS N01 CA045807NCI NIH HHS U10 CA021115NCI NIH HHS U10 CA023318NCI NIH HHS U10 CA035103NCI NIH HHS U10 CA035113NCI NIH HHS U10 CA035267NCI NIH HHS U10 CA037417NCI NIH HHS U10 CA039229NCI NIH HHS U10 CA045807NCI NIH HHS U10 CA063848NCI NIH HHS U10 CA066636NCI NIH HHS U10 CA098413NCI NIH HHS U10 CA107868NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180794NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180816NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180820NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180844NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180850NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180864NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180867NCI NIH HHS U24 CA196172NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189825NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189830NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189863NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189971
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundErlotinib is approved for the treatment of all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but is most active in the treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC. Cabozantinib, a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, targets MET, VEGFR, RET, ROS1, and AXL, which are implicated in lung cancer tumorigenesis. We compared the efficacy of cabozantinib alone or in combination with erlotinib versus erlotinib alone in patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC.

methodsThis three group, randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial was done in 37 academic and community oncology practices in the USA. Patients were eligible if they had received one or two previous treatments for advanced non-squamous, EGFR wild-type, NSCLC. Patients were stratified by performance status and line of therapy, and randomly assigned using permuted blocks within strata to receive open-label oral daily dosing of erlotinib (150 mg), cabozantinib (60 mg), or erlotinib (150 mg) and cabozantinib (40 mg). Imaging was done every 8 weeks. At the time of radiographic progression, there was optional crossover for patients in either single-drug group to receive combination treatment. The primary endpoint was to compare progression-free survival in patients given erlotinib alone versus cabozantinib alone, and in patients given erlotinib alone versus the combination of erlotinib plus cabozantinib. We assessed the primary endpoint in the per-protocol population, which was defined as all patients who were eligible, randomly assigned, and received at least one dose of treatment. The safety analysis population included all patients who received study treatment irrespective of eligibility. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01708954.

findingsBetween Feb 7, 2013, and July 1, 2014, we enrolled and randomly assigned 42 patients to erlotinib treatment, 40 patients to cabozantinib treatment, and 43 patients to erlotinib plus cabozantinib treatment, of whom 111 (89%) in total were included in the primary analysis (erlotinib [n=38], cabozantinib [n=38], erlotinib plus cabozantinib [n=35]). Compared with erlotinib alone (median 1·8 months [95% CI 1·7-2·2]), progression-free survival was significantly improved in the cabozantinib group (4·3 months [3·6-7·4]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 80% CI 0·27-0·55; one-sided p=0·0003) and in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group (4·7 months [2·4-7·4]; HR 0·37, 0·25-0·53; one-sided p=0·0003). Among participants included in the safety analysis of the erlotinib (n=40), cabozantinib (n=40), and erlotinib plus cabozantinib (n=39) groups, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (three [8%] cases in the erlotinib group vs three [8%] in the cabozantinib group vs 11 [28%] in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group), hypertension (none vs ten [25%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (five [13%] vs six [15%] vs six [15%]), oral mucositis (none vs four [10%] vs one [3%]), and thromboembolic event (none vs three [8%] vs two [5%]). One death due to respiratory failure occurred in the cabozantinib group, deemed possibly related to either drug, and one death due to pneumonitis occurred in the erlotinib plus cabozantinib group, deemed related to either drug or the combination.

interpretationDespite its small sample size, this trial showed that, in patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC, cabozantinib alone or combined with erlotinib has clinically meaningful, superior efficacy to that of erlotinib alone, with additional toxicity that was generally manageable. Cabozantinib-based regimens are promising for further investigation in this patient population.

fundingECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Indexed as

AgedAnilidesCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedProtein Kinase InhibitorsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-metPyridinesAnilidescabozantinibErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideMET protein, humanProtein Kinase InhibitorsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-metPyridines

Identifiers

PMID27825638
PMCPMC5154681
OpenAlexW2547345470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.