Vandetanib plus docetaxel versus docetaxel as second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ZODIAC): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial

Abstract

Summary Background Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, and rearranged during transfection (RET) tyrosine kinases. In a randomised phase 2 study in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adding vandetanib 100 mg to docetaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with docetaxel alone, including a longer PFS in women. These results supported investigation of the combination in this larger, definitive phase 3 trial (ZODIAC). Methods Between May, 2006, and April, 2008, patients with locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB–IV) NSCLC after progression following first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 through a third-party interactive voice system to receive vandetanib (100 mg/day) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 IV every 21 days; maximum six cycles) or placebo plus docetaxel. The primary objective was comparison of PFS between the two groups in the intention-to-treat population. Women were a coprimary analysis population. This study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00312377. Findings 1391 patients received vandetanib plus docetaxel (n=694 [197 women]) or placebo plus docetaxel (n=697 [224 women]). Vandetanib plus docetaxel led to a significant improvement in PFS versus docetaxel alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, 97·58% CI 0·70–0·90; p<0·0001); median PFS was 4·0 months in the vandetanib group versus 3·2 months in placebo group. A similar improvement in PFS with vandetanib plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel was seen in women (HR 0·79, 0·62–1·00, p=0·024); median PFS was 4·6 months in the vandetanib group versus 4·2 months in the placebo group. Among grade 3 or higher adverse events, rash (63/689 [9%] vs 7/690 [1%]), neutropenia (199/689 [29%] vs 164/690 [24%]), and febrile neutropenia (61/689 [9%] vs 48/690 [7%]) were more common with vandetanib plus docetaxel than with placebo plus docetaxel. The most common serious adverse event was febrile neutropenia (46/689 [7%] in the vandetanib group vs 38/690 [6%] in the placebo group). Interpretation The addition of vandetanib to docetaxel provides a significant improvement in PFS in patients with advanced NSCLC after progression following first-line therapy. Funding AstraZeneca.

Incidence, Diagnosis, and Management of QT Prolongation Induced by Cancer Therapies: A Systematic Review

“…A meta‐analysis of 9 randomized trials with 4813 patients estimated a risk ratio for QTc prolongation versus control of 7.90 (95% confidence interval, 4.03–15.50) 154. In our review, the weighted incidence of any vandetanib‐related QTc prolongation was 8.6%, with QTc >500 ms in 2.6% 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70155, 156, 157 Because of its long half‐life (19 days), special care is needed when monitoring patients with QTc prolongation.…”

Risk of venous thromboembolic events associated with VEGFR‐TKIs: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Figure 1 outlined the selection process in detail. These trials represented three studies with sorafenib, 21,31,32 three with sunitinib, 20,33,34 three with vandetanib [35][36][37] and five with pazopanib. 2,[38][39][40][41] The characteristics of each included trial were presented in Table 2.…”

“…Since the decrease risk of VTEs mainly comes from the study conducted by Herbst et al, the incidence of VTEs or embolic events was 2% (14/689) in vandetanib group versus 4% (27/690) in the control group. 36 As a result, more high-quality RCTs are still needed to investigate the risk of VEGFR-TKI associated VTEs.…”

Molecular pathology of lung cancer: key to personalized medicine

“…5,28,29,[37][38][39] Recent studies have provided more compelling evidence of the clinical benefits of anti-EGFR treatment in the appropriate setting. 13,15,22,38,[40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] Evidence from the large phase III randomized Iressa Pan-Asia Study trial and other phase III trials have prompted the American Society of Clinical Oncology to issue a provisional clinical opinion recommending the testing of EGFR mutational status in patients being considered for first line EGFR TKI therapy owing to their demonstrated benefit on progression-free survival. 22,41 Of note, they caution that no definitive benefit has been shown in patients treated with first-line TKIs in regards to overall survival.…”