Abstract:Background: Treatment options for patients (pts) with advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung progressing after platinum-based chemotherapy are limited. Overexpression of EGFR, ErbB receptors and the dysregulation of their downstream pathways are implicated in SCC pathobiology. Primary analysis of LL8 (second-line afatinib [A], an irreversible ErbB family blocker vs erlotinib [E], a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI] and the only TKI approved in this setting, in pts with SCC of the lung) showed significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) with A. Overall survival (OS) and updated PFS for LL8 are reported here.Material (patients) and methods: Pts with stage IIIB/IV disease were randomised 1:1 to receive A (40 mg/day) or E (150 mg/day) until disease progression. Primary endpoint: PFS; key secondary endpoint: OS. Other endpoints: objective response (ORR), disease control (DCR), patient reported outcomes and safety. 632 events and a sample size of 800 pts were needed to detect a HR of 0.8 with 80% power for OS.Results: OS was significantly better with A (n = 398) vs E (n = 397), with a 19% reduced risk of death (median 7.9 vs 6.8 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.95]; p = 0.008). Significant differences in OS were seen at 6 (63.6 vs 54.6%; p = 0.010), 12 (36.4 vs 28.2%; p = 0.016) and 18 (22.0 vs 14.4%; p = 0.013) mos. PFS (median 2.6 vs 1.9 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.96]; p = 0.010), ORR (5.5 vs 2.8%; p = 0.055) and DCR (50.5 vs 39.5%; p = 0.002) were all better for A vs E. More pts had improved global health status/quality of life (35.7 vs 28.3%; p = 0.041), cough (43.4 vs 35.2%; p = 0.029) and dyspnea (51.3 vs 44.1%; p = 0.061) with A vs E. Adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable (G = 3 AEs: 57.1 and 57.5% for A vs E) with a higher incidence of drug-related G3/4 diarrhoea (9.9/0.5 vs 2.3/0.3%), G3 stomatitis (4.1 vs 0%) with A and a higher incidence of G3 rash/acne with E (5.9 vs 10.4%). Preliminary data from FoundationOne™ analysis of tumour blocks will be shown.Conclusion: A significantly improved OS vs E in pts with SCC of the lung in a second-line setting. PFS and DCR were also significantly better. With a manageable AE profile, added QoL benefit, and symptom control seen in LL8, A should be preferred over E for these pts. Background: Treatment options for patients (pts) with advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung progressing after platinum-based chemotherapy are limited. Overexpression of EGFR, ErbB receptors and the dysregulation of their downstream pathways are implicated in SCC pathobiology. Primary analysis of LL8 (second-line afatinib [A], an irreversible ErbB family blocker vs erlotinib [E], a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI] and the only TKI approved in this setting, in pts with SCC of the lung) showed significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) with A. Overall survival (OS) and updated PFS for LL8 are reported here. Material (patients) and methods: Pts with stage IIIB/IV disease were randomised 1:1 to receive A (40 mg/day) or E (150 mg/day) until disease progression. Primary endpoint: PFS; key secondary endpoint: OS. Other endpoints: objective response (ORR), disease control (DCR), patient reported outcomes and safety. 632 events and a sample size of 800 pts were needed to detect a HR of 0.8 with 80% power for OS. Results: OS was significantly better with A (n = 398) vs E (n = 397), with a 19% reduced risk of death (median 7.9 vs 6.8 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.95]; p = 0.008). Significant differences in OS were seen at 6 (63.6 vs 54.6%; p = 0.010), 12 (36.4 vs 28.2%; p = 0.016) and 18 (22.0 vs 14.4%; p = 0.013) mos. PFS (median 2.6 vs 1.9 mos; HR [95% CI] 0.81 [0.69–0.96]; p = 0.010), ORR (5.5 vs 2.8%; p = 0.055) and DCR (50.5 vs 39.5%; p = 0.002) were all better for A vs E. More pts had improved global health status/quality of life (35.7 vs 28.3%; p = 0.041), cough (43.4 vs 35.2%; p = 0.029) and dyspnea (51.3 vs 44.1%; p = 0.061) with A vs E. Adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable (G = 3 AEs: 57.1 and 57.5% for A vs E) with a higher incidence of drug-related G3/4 diarrhoea (9.9/0.5 vs 2.3/0.3%), G3 stomatitis (4.1 vs 0%) with A and a higher incidence of G3 rash/acne with E (5.9 vs 10.4%). Preliminary data from FoundationOne™ analysis of tumour blocks will be shown. Conclusion: A significantly improved OS vs E in pts with SCC of the lung in a second-line setting. PFS and DCR were also significantly better. With a manageable AE profile, added QoL benefit, and symptom control seen in LL8, A should be preferred over E for these pts.

P3.01-043 Impact of ErbB Mutations on Clinical Outcomes in Afatinib- or Erlotinib-Treated Patients with SCC of the Lung

P13 Impact of ErbB Mutations on Clinical Outcomes in Afatinib- or Erlotinib-Treated Patients with SCC of the Lung

Association of ERBB Mutations With Clinical Outcomes of Afatinib- or Erlotinib-Treated Patients With Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Secondary Analysis of the LUX-Lung 8 Randomized Clinical Trial.

443PPhase III trial of afatinib vs erlotinib in patients (pts) with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the lung (LUX-Lung 8): EGFR molecular aberrations and survival outcomes

P3.02b-003 Second-Line Afatinib Versus Erlotinib for Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung (Lux-Lung 8): Analysis of Tumor and Serum Biomarkers: Topic: EGFR Biomarkers

P2.02 Second-line Afatinib Vs Erlotinib for Advanced Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Final Analysis of the Phase 3 LUX-Lung 8 Trial

Interim Analysis of Afatinib Monotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Nsclc Progressing after Chemotherapy and Erlotinib/Gefitinib (E/G) in A Trial of Afatinib Plus Paclitaxel Versus Investigator'S Choice Chemotherapy Following Progression on Afatinib Monotherapy

P2.06-013 Afatinib in Patients with Advanced HER2 Mutation-Positive (M+) NSCLC Previously Treated with Chemotherapy: Topic: Phase II + NK

Afatinib Vs Gefitinib in Patients (pts) with EGFR Mutation-Positive (egfrm+) NSCLC: Overall Survival (OS) Data from LUX-Lung 7 (LL7)

Afatinib Versus Erlotinib As Second-Line Treatment of Patients (pts) with Advanced Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC): Final Analysis of the Global Phase III LUX-Lung 8 (LL8) Trial.

Clinical Activity of Afatinib in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harbouring Uncommon Egfr Mutations: A Combined Post-Hoc Analysis of Lux-Lung 2, Lux-Lung 3, and Lux-Lung 6

Afatinib versus placebo for patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer after failure of erlotinib, gefitinib, or both, and one or two lines of chemotherapy (LUX-Lung 1): A phase 2b/3 randomised trial

445P Overall Survival (OS) with Afatinib (A) Vs Chemotherapy (CT) in Patients (pts) with NSCLC Harboring EGFR Mutations (mut): Subgroup Analyses by Race in LUX-Lung 3 (LL3) and LUX-Lung 6 (LL6)

Does EGFR Mutation Type Influence Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Advanced EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer? Analysis of Two Large, Phase III Studies Comparing Afatinib with Chemotherapy (Lux-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6)

Afatinib Vs Erlotinib As Second-Line Therapy of Patients with Advanced Scc of the Lung Following Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: Os Analysis from the Global Phase Iii Trial Lux-Lung 8 (Ll8)

OA23.05 First-Line Afatinib Versus Gefitinib in EGFRm+ Advanced NSCLC: Updated Overall Survival Analysis of LUX-Lung 7

OA23.03 Second-Line Afatinib for Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung: Analysis of Afatinib Long-Term Responders in the Phase III LUX-Lung 8 Trial

LUX-Lung 8 Phase III Trial: Analysis of Long-Term Response to Second-Line Afatinib in Patients with Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC) of the Lung

P1.14-62 Afatinib in EGFR TKI-Naïve Patients with EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC: Combined Analysis of Two Single-Arm Phase IIIb Studies

Long-term Efficacy of Afatinib in a Patient with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lung and Multiple ERBB Family Aberrations