Background:The initial randomized,double-blinded,actively controlled,phase III ANEAS study(NCT03849768)demonstrated that aumolertinib showed superior efficacy relative to gefitinib as first-line therapy in epidermal g...Background:The initial randomized,double-blinded,actively controlled,phase III ANEAS study(NCT03849768)demonstrated that aumolertinib showed superior efficacy relative to gefitinib as first-line therapy in epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC).Metastatic disease in the central nervous system(CNS)remains a challenge in the management of NSCLC.This study aimed to compare the efficacy of aumolertinib versus gefitinib among patients with baseline CNS metastases in the ANEAS study.Methods:Eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to orally receive either aumolertinib or gefitinib in a double-blinded fashion.Patients with asymptomatic,stable CNS metastases were included.Follow-up imaging of the same modality as the initial CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 15 months,then every 12weeks.CNS responsewas assessed by a neuroradiological blinded,independent central review(neuroradiological-BICR).The primary endpoint for this subgroup analysis was CNS progression-free survival(PFS).Results:Of the 429 patients enrolled and randomized in the ANEAS study,106 patients were found to have CNS metastases(CNS Full Analysis Set,cFAS)at baseline by neuroradiological-BICR,and 60 of them had CNS target lesions(CNS Evaluable for Response,cEFR).Treatment with aumolertinib significantly prolonged median CNS PFS compared with gefitinib in both cFAS(29.0 vs.8.3 months;hazard ratio[HR]=0.31;95%confidence interval[CI],0.17-0.56;P<0.001)and cEFR(29.0 vs.8.3 months;HR=0.26;95%CI,0.11-0.57;P<0.001).The confirmed CNS overall response rate in cEFRwas 85.7%and 75.0%in patients treated with aumolertinib and gefitinib,respectively.Competing risk analysis showed that the estimated probability of CNS progression without prior non-CNS progression or death was consistently lower with aumolertinib than with gefitinib in patients with and without CNSmetastases at baseline.No new safety findings were observed.Conclusions:These results indicate a potential advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib in terms of CNS PFS and the risk of CNS progression in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC with baseline CNS metastases.展开更多
基金Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co.LtdNational Natural Science Foundation of China,Grant/Award Numbers:82030045,82241227+3 种基金National Multi-disciplinary Treatment Project for Major Diseases,Grant/Award Number:2020NMDTPCollaborative Innovation Center for Clinical and Translational Science by Ministry of Education&Shanghai,Grant/Award Numbers:CCTS-202204,CCTS-202304Shanghai Chest Hospital Basic Research Project,Grant/Award Number:2023YNKT-1Pujiang Program,Grant/Award Number:22PJ1420700。
文摘Background:The initial randomized,double-blinded,actively controlled,phase III ANEAS study(NCT03849768)demonstrated that aumolertinib showed superior efficacy relative to gefitinib as first-line therapy in epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR)-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC).Metastatic disease in the central nervous system(CNS)remains a challenge in the management of NSCLC.This study aimed to compare the efficacy of aumolertinib versus gefitinib among patients with baseline CNS metastases in the ANEAS study.Methods:Eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to orally receive either aumolertinib or gefitinib in a double-blinded fashion.Patients with asymptomatic,stable CNS metastases were included.Follow-up imaging of the same modality as the initial CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 15 months,then every 12weeks.CNS responsewas assessed by a neuroradiological blinded,independent central review(neuroradiological-BICR).The primary endpoint for this subgroup analysis was CNS progression-free survival(PFS).Results:Of the 429 patients enrolled and randomized in the ANEAS study,106 patients were found to have CNS metastases(CNS Full Analysis Set,cFAS)at baseline by neuroradiological-BICR,and 60 of them had CNS target lesions(CNS Evaluable for Response,cEFR).Treatment with aumolertinib significantly prolonged median CNS PFS compared with gefitinib in both cFAS(29.0 vs.8.3 months;hazard ratio[HR]=0.31;95%confidence interval[CI],0.17-0.56;P<0.001)and cEFR(29.0 vs.8.3 months;HR=0.26;95%CI,0.11-0.57;P<0.001).The confirmed CNS overall response rate in cEFRwas 85.7%and 75.0%in patients treated with aumolertinib and gefitinib,respectively.Competing risk analysis showed that the estimated probability of CNS progression without prior non-CNS progression or death was consistently lower with aumolertinib than with gefitinib in patients with and without CNSmetastases at baseline.No new safety findings were observed.Conclusions:These results indicate a potential advantage of aumolertinib over gefitinib in terms of CNS PFS and the risk of CNS progression in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC with baseline CNS metastases.
