Lynne Poole

BACKGROUND: )-mutated, stage IB to IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adjuvant osimertinib therapy, with or without previous adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo in the ADAURA trial. We report the results of the planned final analysis of overall survival. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned eligible patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive osimertinib (80 mg once daily) or placebo until disease recurrence was observed, the trial regimen was completed (3 years), or a discontinuation criterion was met. The primary end point was investigator-assessed disease-free survival among patients with stage II to IIIA disease. Secondary end points included disease-free survival among patients with stage IB to IIIA disease, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Of 682 patients who underwent randomization, 339 received osimertinib and 343 received placebo. Among patients with stage II to IIIA disease, the 5-year overall survival was 85% in the osimertinib group and 73% in the placebo group (overall hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95.03% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.73; P<0.001). In the overall population (patients with stage IB to IIIA disease), the 5-year overall survival was 88% in the osimertinib group and 78% in the placebo group (overall hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95.03% CI, 0.34 to 0.70; P<0.001). One new serious adverse event, pneumonia related to coronavirus disease 2019, was reported after the previously published data-cutoff date (the event was not considered by the investigator to be related to the trial regimen, and the patient fully recovered). Adjuvant osimertinib had a safety profile consistent with that in the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: -mutated, stage IB to IIIA NSCLC. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ADAURA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02511106.).

PURPOSE The open-label, phase III POSEIDON study evaluated tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy (T + D + CT) and durvalumab plus chemotherapy (D + CT) versus chemotherapy alone (CT) in first-line metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). METHODS Patients (n = 1,013) with EGFR/ ALK wild-type mNSCLC were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to tremelimumab 75 mg plus durvalumab 1,500 mg and platinum-based chemotherapy for up to four 21-day cycles, followed by durvalumab once every 4 weeks until progression and one additional tremelimumab dose; durvalumab plus chemotherapy for up to four 21-day cycles, followed by durvalumab once every 4 weeks until progression; or chemotherapy for up to six 21-day cycles (with or without maintenance pemetrexed; all arms). Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for D + CT versus CT. Key alpha-controlled secondary end points were PFS and OS for T + D + CT versus CT. RESULTS PFS was significantly improved with D + CT versus CT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.89; P = .0009; median, 5.5 v 4.8 months); a trend for improved OS did not reach statistical significance (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.02; P = .0758; median, 13.3 v 11.7 months; 24-month OS, 29.6% v 22.1%). PFS (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.86; P = .0003; median, 6.2 v 4.8 months) and OS (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.92; P = .0030; median, 14.0 v 11.7 months; 24-month OS, 32.9% v 22.1%) were significantly improved with T + D + CT versus CT. Treatment-related adverse events were maximum grade 3/4 in 51.8%, 44.6%, and 44.4% of patients receiving T + D + CT, D + CT, and CT, respectively; 15.5%, 14.1%, and 9.9%, respectively, discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION D + CT significantly improved PFS versus CT. A limited course of tremelimumab added to durvalumab and chemotherapy significantly improved OS and PFS versus CT, without meaningful additional tolerability burden, representing a potential new option in first-line mNSCLC.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the broader efficacy (i.e., improvements in quality of life/functional outcomes) of atomoxetine compared with standard current therapy (SCT) in UK paediatric patients with ADHD and to explore clinician/parent/child perceptions of ADHD. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 201 patients with ADHD were randomised into this multi-centre, open-label study to receive atomoxetine (n = 104) or SCT (n = 97) for 10 weeks. Broader efficacy was assessed using the parent-rated Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition (CHIP-CE) total (global) t-score. Secondary outcome measures included the five CHIP-CE domains; parent-rated Family Burden of Illness Module (FBIM); investigator-rated ADHD-Rating Scale; investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity/Improvement scales; and child-rated Harter Self-Perception Profile (HSPP). RESULTS: Quality of life of children/adolescents with ADHD was extremely compromised at baseline (CHIP-CE total t-scores: atomoxetine, 23.2 +/- 12.2; SCT, 23.9 +/- 11.0), and improved during the 10-week study for both groups; the CHIP-CE score was statistically significantly higher for patients treated with atomoxetine (38.4 +/- 1.3) compared with SCT (30.8 +/- 1.3) at week 10 (p < 0.001). ADHD-RS, CGI-Severity, and CGI-Improvement scores were significantly different between the groups in favour of atomoxetine (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in the HSPP Social Acceptance domain in favour of atomoxetine, but not in the five other HSPP domains or FBIM total score. Atomoxetine was well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this open-label trial show that atomoxetine is superior to SCT in addressing broader efficacy and functional outcomes in UK children/adolescents with ADHD. This study contributes to the understanding of broader efficacy in children with ADHD, and is timely in light of recent NICE guidance.