Survival Results
Proven survival in the treatment of first-line advanced pancreatic cancer
Tarceva plus gemcitabine significantly improved overall survival throughout the pivotal trial vs gemcitabine alone3
- Hazard ratio is an important measure of overall survival in rapidly progressive diseases such as pancreatic cancer because it encompasses the whole observation period and not just a single point estimate, such as the median.2
- One-year survival with Tarceva plus gemcitabine was 23.8% vs 19.4% with gemcitabine alone.3
- With the addition of Tarceva, more patients lived a full year or more beyond diagnosis: approximately 1 in 4 with combination therapy vs 1 in 5 with gemcitabine alone.3
Proven survival in the treatment of first-line advanced pancreatic cancer
Retrospective data suggest Tarceva-related rash (≥grade 2) is associated with a clinical benefit23
Suggested correlation between rash and overall survival
- Based on a retrospective, exploratory analysis, a strong correlation was observed between the presence of rash and improved survival in the pivotal phase III clinical trial.23
- These results must be interpreted with caution but appear to suggest that patients with minimal or no rash (>grade 2) may not benefit from Tarceva plus gemcitabine.23
- These data do not support increasing the dosage of Tarceva to cause patients to develop a rash.
Advanced pancreatic cancer indication
Tarceva in combination with
gemcitabine is indicated for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer.
Important safety information
- There have been reports of serious Interstitial Lung Disease
(ILD)-like events, including fatalities, in patients receiving Tarceva. In the pancreatic cancer study, the incidence was 2.5% in the Tarceva/gemcitabine group vs. 0.4% in the placebo/gemcitabine group. The overall incidence of ILD-like events in approximately 32,000 Tarceva-treated patients from all studies (including uncontrolled studies and studies with concurrent chemotherapy) was approximately 1.1%.
- Reported diagnoses in patients suspected of having ILD-like events included pneumonitis, radiation pneumonitis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, interstitial pneumonia, ILD, obliterative bronchiolitis, pulmonary fibrosis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and lung infiltration. Symptoms started from 5 days to more than 9 months (median 39 days) after initiating Tarceva therapy.
- Tarceva should be interrupted for acute onset of new or progressive unexplained pulmonary symptoms such as dyspnea, cough, and fever. If ILD is diagnosed, Tarceva should be discontinued and appropriate treatment instituted as needed.
- Cases of hepatorenal syndrome, acute renal failure (including fatalities), and renal insufficiency have been reported. Some were secondary to baseline hepatic impairment while others were associated with severe dehydration due to diarrhea, vomiting, and/or anorexia or concurrent chemotherapy use. In the event of dehydration, particularly in patients with contributing risk factors for renal failure (eg, pre-existing renal disease, medical conditions or medications that may lead to renal disease, or other predisposing conditions including advanced age), Tarceva therapy should be interrupted and appropriate measures should be taken to intensively rehydrate the patient. Periodic monitoring of renal function and serum electrolytes is recommended in patients at risk of dehydration.
- Cases of hepatic failure and hepatorenal syndrome (including fatalities) have been reported during use of Tarceva, particularly in patients with baseline hepatic impairment. Therefore, periodic liver function testing (transaminases, bilirubin, and alkaline phosphatase) is recommended. In the setting of worsening liver function tests, dose interruption and/or dose reduction with frequent liver function test monitoring should be considered. Tarceva dosing should be interrupted or discontinued if total bilirubin is >3 x ULN and/or transaminases are >5 x ULN in the setting of normal pretreatment values.
- Treatment with Tarceva should be used with extra caution in patients with total bilirubin > 3 x ULN. Patients with hepatic impairment (total bilirubin > ULN or Child-Pugh A, B and C) should be closely monitored during therapy with Tarceva. Tarceva dosing should be interrupted or discontinued if changes in liver function are severe such as doubling of total bilirubin and/or tripling of transaminases in the setting of pretreatment values outside normal range.
- Gastrointestinal perforation (including fatalities) has been reported in patients receiving Tarceva. Patients receiving concomitant anti-angiogenic agents, corticosteroids, NSAIDs, and/or taxane-based chemotherapy, or who have prior history of peptic ulceration or diverticular disease are at increased risk. Permanently discontinue Tarceva in patients who develop gastrointestinal perforation.
- Bullous, blistering and exfoliative skin conditions have been reported including cases suggestive of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis, which in some cases were fatal. Interrupt or discontinue Tarceva treatment if the patient develops severe bullous, blistering or exfoliating conditions.
- In the pancreatic cancer trial, myocardial infarction/ischemia occurred in 2.3% of patients (6 patients) in the Tarceva/gemcitabine group vs. 1.2% (3 patients) in the placebo/gemcitabine group. One patient in the Tarceva/gemcitabine group and one patient in the placebo/gemcitabine group died due to myocardial infarction.
- In the pancreatic cancer trial, 2.3% of patients (6 patients) in the Tarceva/gemcitabine group developed cerebrovascular accidents vs. no cerebrovascular accidents in the placebo/gemcitabine group. One of the cerebrovascular accidents was hemorrhagic and fatal.
- In the pancreatic cancer trial, 0.8% of patients (2 patients) developed microangiopathic hemolytic anemia with thrombocytopenia in the Tarceva/gemcitabine group vs. no cases in the placebo/gemcitabine group.
- Corneal perforation and ulceration have been reported during use of Tarceva. Other ocular disorders including abnormal eyelash growth, keratoconjunctivitis sicca or keratitis have been observed with Tarceva treatment and are known risk factors for corneal ulceration/perforation. Interrupt or discontinue Tarceva therapy if patients present with acute/worsening ocular disorders such as eye pain.
- International Normalized Ratio (INR) elevation and infrequent reports of bleeding events, including gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal bleeding, have been reported in clinical studies, some associated with concomitant warfarin administration. Patients taking warfarin or other coumarin-derivative anticoagulants should be monitored regularly for changes in prothrombin time or INR. Some infrequent cases of gastrointestinal bleeding were also associated with concomitant NSAID administration.
- Tarceva is pregnancy category D. When receiving Tarceva, women of childbearing potential should be advised to avoid pregnancy and pregnant women apprised of the potential hazard to a fetus. Adequate contraception methods should be used during therapy, and for at least 2 weeks after completing therapy. Because of the potential for serious adverse reactions in nursing infants from Tarceva, a decision should be made whether to discontinue nursing or discontinue the drug.
- Erlotinib is metabolized predominantly by CYP3A4, and inhibitors of CYP3A4 would be expected to increase exposure. Caution should be used during co-treatment with Tarceva and ketoconazole or other strong CYP3A4 inhibitors such as, but not limited to: atazanavir,clarithromycin, indinavir, itraconazole, nefazodone, nelfinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, telithromycin, troleandomycin (TAO) and voriconazole, and grapefruit or grapefruit juice.
- The CYP3A4 inducer rifampicin has been shown to decrease erlotinib AUC, thus, alternate treatments lacking CYP3A4 inducing activity are strongly recommended. In the absence of an alternative treatment, Tarceva dose modification should be considered. If the Tarceva dose is adjusted upward, the dose will need to be reduced immediately to the indicated starting dose upon discontinuation of rifampicin or other CYP3A4 inducers such as, but not limited to: rifabutin, rifapentine, phenytoin, carbamazepine, phenobarbital and St. John's Wort.
- Drugs that alter the pH of the upper GI tract may alter the solubility of erlotinib and reduce its bioavailability. The concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors, such as omeprazole with Tarceva should be avoided if possible. If patients need to be treated with an H2-receptor antagonist such as ranitidine, it should be used in a staggered manner. Although the effect of antacids on erlotinib pharmacokinetics has not been evaluated, the antacid dose and the Tarceva dose should be separated by several hours, if an antacid is necessary.
- Patients should be advised to stop smoking while taking Tarceva as cigarette smoking has been shown to reduce erlotinib AUC. However, if patients continue to smoke, a cautious increase in the dose of Tarceva, not to exceed 300 mg, may be considered while monitoring the patient's safety. If the Tarceva dose is adjusted upward, the dose should be reduced immediately to the indicated starting dose upon cessation of smoking.
- The most common adverse reactions in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving Tarceva 100 mg plus gemcitabine were fatigue, rash, nausea, anorexia and diarrhea. Severe rash and diarrhea (5% and 5% NCI-CTC, Grades 3/4, respectively) were reported. Rash and diarrhea each resulted in dose reductions in 2% of patients, and discontinuation in up to 1% of patients receiving Tarceva/gemcitabine.
- 1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Clinical practice guidelines in oncology: pancreatic adenocarcinoma (version 1.2009). Fort Washington, PA: NCCN; 2009.
- 2. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, et al. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(15):1960-1966.
- 3. Tarceva [package insert]. Melville, NY: OSI Pharmaceuticals Inc; 2010.
- 4. Cunningham D, Chau I, Stocken DD, et al. Phase III randomized comparison of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5487-5491.
- 5. Poplin E, Feng Y, Berlin J, et al. Phase III, randomized study of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin versus gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) compared with gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in patients with pancreatic carcinoma E6201: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(23):3778-3785.
- 6. Van Cutsem E, Vervenne WL, Bennouna J, et al. Phase III trial of bevacizumab in combination with gemcitabine and erlotinib in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(13):2231-2237.
- 7. Herrmann R, Bodoky G, Ruhstaller T, et al. Gemcitabine plus capecitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(16):2212-2217.
- 8. Kindler HL, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, et al; Cancer and Leukemia Group B. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine (G) plus bevacizumab (B) versus gemcitabine plus placebo (P) in patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a preliminary analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB). J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(18)(suppl):4508.
- 9. Philip PA, Benedetti J, Fenoglio-Preiser C, et al. Phase III study of gemcitabine [G] plus cetuximab [C] versus gemcitabine in patients [pts] with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma [PC]: SWOG S0205 study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(18)(suppl):LBA4509.
- 10. Abou-Alfa GK, Letourneau R, Harker G, et al. Randomized phase III study of exatecan and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in untreated advanced pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(27):4441-4447.
- 11. Heinemann V, Quietzsch D, Gieseler F, et al. Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(24):3946-3952.
- 12. Stathopoulos GP, Syrigos K, Aravantinos G, et al. A multicenter phase III trial comparing irinotecan-gemcitabine (IG) with gemcitabine (G) monotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer. 2006;95(5):587-592.
- 13. Louvet C, Labianca R, Hammel P, et al. Gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin compared with gemcitabine alone in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: results of a GERCOR and GISCAD phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(15):3509-3516.
- 14. Oettle H, Richards D, Ramanathan RK, et al. A phase III trial of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in patients with unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(10):1639-1645.
- 15. Riess H, Helm A, Niedergethmann M, et al. A randomised, prospective, multicenter, phase III trial of gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), folinic acid vs. gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Presented at: 41st American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; May 13-17, 2005; Orlando, FL. Abstract 4009.
- 16. Shapiro J, Marshall J, Karasek P, et al. G17DT+gemcitabine [Gem] versus placebo+Gem in untreated subjects with locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: results of a randomized, double-blind, multinational, multicenter study. Presented at: 41st American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; May 13-17, 2005; Orlando, FL. Abstract 4012.
- 17. Nieto J, Grossbard ML, Kozuch P. Metastatic pancreatic cancer 2008: is the glass less empty? Oncologist. 2008;13(5):562-576.
- 18. Rocha Lima CM, Green MR, Rotche R, et al. Irinotecan plus gemcitabine results in no survival advantage compared with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer despite increased tumor response rate. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(18):3776-3783.
- 19. Van Cutsem E, van de Velde H, Karasek P, et al. Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus tipifarnib compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(8):1430-1438.
- 20. Berlin JD, Catalano P, Thomas JP, Kugler JW, Haller DG, Benson AB III. Phase III study of gemcitabine in combination with fluorouracil versus gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial E2297. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(15):3270-3275.
- 21. Bramhall SR, Schulz J, Nemunaitis J, Brown PD, Baillet M, Buckels JAC. A double-blind placebo-controlled, randomised study comparing gemcitabine and marimastat with gemcitabine and placebo as first line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer. 2002;87(2):161-167.
- 22. Burris HA III, Moore MJ, Andersen J, et al. Improvements in survival and clinical benefit with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreas cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(6):2403-2413.
- 23. Senderowicz AM, Johnson JR, Sridhara R, Zimmerman P, Justice R, Pazdur R. Erlotinib/gemcitabine for first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Oncology (Williston Park). 2007;21(14):1696-1706. 24. Data on file, OSI Pharmaceuticals Inc.