Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Exploratory Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HAD-B1 for Dose-Finding in EGFR Mutation Positive and Locally Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC Subjects Who Need Afatinib Therapy

• Published in: Integrative cancer therapies Vol. 20; p. 15347354211037917
• Main Authors: Ko, Eun-Ju, Kwag, Eun-Bin, Park, Ji Hye, Park, So-Jung, Son, Ji-Woong, Yoon, Seong-Hun, Shin, Seong-Hun, Yoo, Hwa-Seung
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 2021; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC; SAGE Publishing
• Subjects: Antitumor agents; Chemotherapy; Clinical trials; Disease control; Dosage; Double-blind studies; Drug dosages; Epidermal growth factor receptors; Lung cancer; Metastases; Mutation; Non-small cell lung carcinoma; Patients; Remission; Safety; Small cell lung carcinoma; Statistical analysis; non-small cell lung cancer; HAD-B1; afatinib; EGFR-TKI; disease control rate
• ISSN: 1534-7354; 1552-695X
• DOI: 10.1177/15347354211037917

Afatinib is a target anticancer drug of the second-generation EGFR TKI type, showing an advantage in treatment effect compared to conventional chemotherapy. However, patients on EGFR-TKI drugs also usually progress after 9 to 13 months according to secondary resistance. HAD-B1 is composed of drugs that are effective against lung cancer. This study is an exploratory study to evaluate the efficacy and safety between dosage groups by conducting a clinical trial in subjects requiring afatinib drug treatment in non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation positive to determine the optimal dosage for HAD-B1 administration. At the final visit compared to before administration, each change in the disease control rate was measured according to the HAD-B1 doses of the test group 1 (972 mg), the test group 2 (1944 mg), and the control group. The efficacy and safety of HAD-B1 were compared and evaluated through sub-evaluation variables. As a result of the study, there was no statistically significant difference in the disease control rate at 12 weeks after dosing, but complete and partial remission were evaluated as 1 patient each in the test group 1, and none in the other groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in the sub-evaluation variable. In addition, there was no problem of safety from taking the test drug. However, the initially planned number of subjects was 66, but the number of enrolled subjects was only 14, which may limit the results of this study.