Erleva

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Erleva is indicated for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR activating mutations.

Erleva is also indicated for switch maintenance treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR activating mutations and stable disease after first-line chemotherapy.

Erleva is also indicated for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. In patients with tumours without EGFR activating mutations, Erleva is indicated when other treatment options are not considered suitable.

When prescribing Erleva, factors associated with prolonged survival should be taken into account.

No survival benefit or other clinically relevant effects of the treatment have been demonstrated in patients with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-IHC negative tumours.

Pancreatic cancer

Erleva in combination with gemcitabine is indicated for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

When prescribing Erleva, factors associated with prolonged survival should be taken into account.

No survival advantage could be shown for patients with locally advanced disease.

Erleva treatment should be supervised by a physician experienced in the use of anti-cancer therapies.

Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

EGFR mutation testing should be performed prior to initiation of Erleva as first-line or switch maintenance therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

The recommended daily dose of Erleva is 150 mg taken at least one hour before or two hours after the ingestion of food.

Patients with pancreatic cancer

The recommended daily dose of Erleva is 100 mg taken at least one hour before or two hours after the ingestion of food, in combination with gemcitabine (see the summary of product characteristics of gemcitabine for the pancreatic cancer indication). In patients who do not develop rash within the first 4 - 8 weeks of treatment, further Erleva treatment should be re-assessed.

When dose adjustment is necessary, the dose should be reduced in 50 mg steps.

Erleva is available in strengths of 25 mg, 100 mg and 150 mg.

Concomitant use of CYP3A4 substrates and modulators may require dose adjustment.

Hepatic impairment

Erlotinib is eliminated by hepatic metabolism and biliary excretion. Although erlotinib exposure was similar in patients with moderately impaired hepatic function (Child-Pugh score 7-9) compared with patients with adequate hepatic function, caution should be used when administering Erleva to patients with hepatic impairment. Dose reduction or interruption of Erleva should be considered if severe adverse reactions occur. The safety and efficacy of erlotinib has not been studied in patients with severe hepatic dysfunction (AST/SGOT and ALT/SGPT> 5 x ULN). Use of Erleva in patients with severe hepatic dysfunction is not recommended.

Renal impairment

The safety and efficacy of erlotinib has not been studied in patients with renal impairment (serum creatinine concentration >1.5 times the upper normal limit). Based on pharmacokinetic data no dose adjustments appear necessary in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. Use of Erleva in patients with severe renal impairment is not recommended.

Paediatric population

The safety and efficacy of erlotinib in patients under the age of 18 years has not been established. Use of Erleva in paediatric patients is not recommended.

Smokers

Cigarette smoking has been shown to reduce erlotinib exposure by 50-60%. The maximum tolerated dose of Erleva in NSCLC patients who currently smoke cigarettes was 300 mg. Efficacy and long term safety of a dose higher than the recommended starting doses have not been established in patients who continue to smoke cigarettes. Therefore, current smokers should be advised to stop smoking, as plasma concentrations of erlotinib in smokers as compared to non-smokers are reduced.

Assessment of EGFR mutation status

When considering the use of Erleva as a first line or maintenance treatment for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, it is important that the EGFR mutation status of a patient is determined.

A validated, robust, reliable and sensitive test with a prespecified positivity threshold and demonstrated utility for the determination of EGFR mutation status, using either tumor DNA derived from a tissue sample or circulating free DNA (cfDNA) obtained from a blood (plasma) sample, should be performed according to local medical practice.

If a plasma-based cfDNA test is used and the result is negative for activating mutations, perform a tissue test wherever possible due to the potential for false negative results from a plasma-based test.

Smokers

Current smokers should be advised to stop smoking, as plasma concentrations of erlotinib in smokers as compared to non-smokers are reduced. The degree of reduction is likely to be clinically significant.

Interstitial Lung Disease

Cases of interstitial lung disease (ILD)-like events, including fatalities, have been reported uncommonly in patients receiving Erleva for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pancreatic cancer or other advanced solid tumours. In the pivotal study BR.21 in NSCLC, the incidence of ILD (0.8%) was the same in both the placebo and Erleva groups. In a meta-analysis of NSCLC randomized controlled clinical trials (excluding phase I and single-arm phase II studies due to lack of control groups), the incidence of ILD-like events was 0.9% on Erleva compared to 0.4% in patients in the control arms. In the pancreatic cancer study in combination with gemcitabine, the incidence of ILD-like events was 2.5% in the Erleva plus gemcitabine group versus 0.4% in the placebo plus gemcitabine treated group. Reported diagnoses in patients suspected of having ILD-like events included pneumonitis, radiation pneumonitis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, interstitial pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, obliterative bronchiolitis, pulmonary fibrosis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), alveolitis, and lung infiltration. Symptoms started from a few days to several months after initiating Erleva therapy. Confounding or contributing factors such as concomitant or prior chemotherapy, prior radiotherapy, pre-existing parenchymal lung disease, metastatic lung disease, or pulmonary infections were frequent. A higher incidence of ILD (approximately 5% with a mortality rate of 1.5%) is seen among patients in studies conducted in Japan.

In patients who develop acute onset of new and/or progressive unexplained pulmonary symptoms such as dyspnoea, cough and fever, Erleva therapy should be interrupted pending diagnostic evaluation. Patients treated concurrently with erlotinib and gemcitabine should be monitored carefully for the possibility to develop ILD-like toxicity. If ILD is diagnosed, Erleva should be discontinued and appropriate treatment initiated as necessary.

Diarrhoea, dehydration, electrolyte imbalance and renal failure

Diarrhoea (including very rare cases with a fatal outcome) has occurred in approximately 50% of patients on Erleva and moderate or severe diarrhoea should be treated with e.g. loperamide. In some cases dose reduction may be necessary. In the clinical studies doses were reduced by 50 mg steps. Dose reductions by 25 mg steps have not been investigated. In the event of severe or persistent diarrhoea, nausea, anorexia, or vomiting associated with dehydration, Erleva therapy should be interrupted and appropriate measures should be taken to treat the dehydration. There have been rare reports of hypokalaemia and renal failure (including fatalities). Some cases were secondary to severe dehydration due to diarrhoea, vomiting and/or anorexia, while others were confounded by concomitant chemotherapy. In more severe or persistent cases of diarrhoea, or cases leading to dehydration, particularly in groups of patients with aggravating risk factors (especially concomitant chemotherapy and other medications, symptoms or diseases or other predisposing conditions including advanced age), Erleva therapy should be interrupted and appropriate measures should be taken to intensively rehydrate the patients intravenously. In addition, renal function and serum electrolytes including potassium should be monitored in patients at risk of dehydration.

Hepatitis, hepatic failure

Rare cases of hepatic failure (including fatalities) have been reported during use of Erleva. Confounding factors have included pre-existing liver disease or concomitant hepatotoxic medications. Therefore, in such patients, periodic liver function testing should be considered. Erleva dosing should be interrupted if changes in liver function are severe. Erleva is not recommended for use in patients with severe hepatic dysfunction.

Gastrointestinal perforation

Patients receiving Erleva are at increased risk of developing gastrointestinal perforation, which was observed uncommonly (including some cases with a fatal outcome). 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. Erleva should be permanently discontinued in patients who develop gastrointestinal perforation.

Bullous and exfoliative skin disorders

Bullous, blistering and exfoliative skin conditions have been reported, including very rare cases suggestive of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/Toxic epidermal necrolysis, which in some cases were fatal. Erleva treatment should be interrupted or discontinued if the patient develops severe bullous, blistering or exfoliating conditions. Patients with bullous and exfoliative skin disorders should be tested for skin infection and treated according to local management guidelines.

Ocular disorders

Patients presenting with signs and symptoms suggestive of keratitis such as acute or worsening: eye inflammation, lacrimation, light sensitivity, blurred vision, eye pain and/or red eye should be referred promptly to an ophthalmology specialist. If a diagnosis of ulcerative keratitis is confirmed, treatment with Erleva should be interrupted or discontinued. If keratitis is diagnosed, the benefits and risks of continuing treatment should be carefully considered. Erleva should be used with caution in patients with a history of keratitis, ulcerative keratitis or severe dry eye. Contact lens use is also a risk factor for keratitis and ulceration.Very rare cases of corneal perforation or ulceration have been reported during use of Erleva.

Interactions with other medicinal products

Potent inducers of CYP3A4 may reduce the efficacy of erlotinib whereas potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 may lead to increased toxicity. Concomitant treatment with these types of agents should be avoided.

Other forms of interactions

Erlotinib is characterised by a decrease in solubility at pH above 5. Medicinal products that alter the pH of the upper Gastro-Intestinal (GI) tract, like proton pump inhibitors, H2 antagonists and antacids, may alter the solubility of erlotinib and hence its bioavailability. Increasing the dose of Erleva when co-administered with such agents is not likely to compensate for the loss of exposure. Combination of erlotinib with proton pump inhibitors should be avoided. The effects of concomitant administration of erlotinib with H2 antagonists and antacids are unknown; however, reduced bioavailability is likely. Therefore, concomitant administration of these combinations should be avoided. If the use of antacids is considered necessary during treatment with Erleva, they should be taken at least 4 hours before or 2 hours after the daily dose of Erleva.

The tablets contain lactose and should not be administered to patients with rare hereditary problems of galactose intolerance, Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose-galactose malabsorption.

No studies on the effects on the ability to drive and use machines have been performed; however erlotinib is not associated with impairment of mental ability.

Non-small cell lung cancer (Erleva administered as monotherapy)

In a randomized double-blind study (BR.21; Erleva administered as second line therapy), rash (75%) and diarrhoea (54%) were the most commonly reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Most were Grade 1/2 in severity and manageable without intervention. Grade 3/4 rash and diarrhoea occurred in 9% and 6%, respectively in Erleva-treated patients and each resulted in study discontinuation in 1% of patients. Dose reduction for rash and diarrhoea was needed in 6% and 1% of patients, respectively. In study BR.21, the median time to onset of rash was 8 days, and the median time to onset of diarrhoea was 12 days.

In general, rash manifests as a mild or moderate erythematous and papulopustular rash, which may occur or worsen in sun exposed areas. For patients who are exposed to sun, protective clothing, and/or use of sun screen (e.g. mineral-containing) may be advisable.

Adverse reactions occurring more frequently (>3%) in Erleva-treated patients than in the placebo group in the pivotal study BR.21, and in at least 10% of patients in the Erleva group, are summarised by National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) Grade in Table 1.

The following terms are used to rank the undesirable effects by frequency: very common (>1/10); common (>1/100 to <1/10); uncommon (>1/1,000 to <1/100); rare (>1/10,000 to <1/1,000); very rare (<1/10,000) including isolated reports.

Within each frequency grouping, adverse reactions are presented in order of decreasing seriousness.

Table 1: Very common ADRs in study BR.21

* Severe infections, with or without neutropenia, have included pneumonia, sepsis, and cellulitis.

** Can lead to dehydration, hypokalemia and renal failure.

*** Rash included dermatitis acneiform.

In two other double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III studies BO18192 (SATURN) and BO25460 (IUNO); Erleva was administered as maintenance after first-line chemotherapy. These studies were conducted in a total of 1532 patients with advanced, recurrent or metastatic NSCLC following first-line standard platinum-based chemotherapy, no new safety signals were identified.

The most frequent ADRs seen in patients treated with Erleva in studies BO18192 and BO25460 were rash and diarrhoea (see Table 2). No Grade 4 rash or diarrhoea was observed in either study. Rash and diarrhoea resulted in discontinuation of Erleva in 1% and <1% of patients, respectively, in study BO18192, while no patients discontinued for rash or diarrhoea in BO25460. Dose modifications (interruptions or reductions) for rash and diarrhoea were needed in 8.3% and 3% of patients, respectively, in study BO18192 and 5.6% and 2.8% of patients, respectively, in study BO25460.

Table 2: Most frequent ADRs in Studies BO18192 (SATURN) and BO25460 (IUNO)

*Safety analysis population

In an open-label, randomized phase III study, ML20650 conducted in 154 patients, the safety of Erleva for first-line treatment of NSCLC patients with EGFR activating mutations was assessed in 75 patients; no new safety signals were observed in these patients.

The most frequent ADRs seen in patients treated with Erleva in study ML20650 were rash and diarrhoea (any Grade 80% and 57%, respectively), most were Grade 1/2 in severity and manageable without intervention. Grade 3 rash and diarrhoea occurred in 9% and 4% of patients, respectively. No Grade 4 rash or diarrhoea was observed. Both rash and diarrhoea resulted in discontinuation of Erleva in 1% of patients. Dose modifications (interruptions or reductions) for rash and diarrhoea were needed in 11% and 7% of patients, respectively.

Pancreatic cancer (Erleva administered concurrently with gemcitabine)

The most common adverse reactions in pivotal study PA.3 in pancreatic cancer patients receiving Erleva 100 mg plus gemcitabine were fatigue, rash and diarrhoea. In the Erleva plus gemcitabine arm, Grade 3/4 rash and diarrhoea were each reported in 5% of patients. The median time to onset of rash and diarrhoea was 10 days and 15 days, respectively. Rash and diarrhoea each resulted in dose reductions in 2% of patients, and resulted in study discontinuation in up to 1% of patients receiving Erleva plus gemcitabine.

Adverse reactions occurring more frequently (>3%) in Erleva 100 mg plus gemcitabine-treated patients than in the placebo plus gemcitabine group in the pivotal study PA.3, and in at least 10% of patients in the Erleva 100 mg plus gemcitabine group, are summarised by National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) Grade in Table 3.

The following terms are used to rank the undesirable effects by frequency: very common (>1/10); common (>1/100 to <1/10); uncommon (>1/1,000 to <1/100); rare (>1/10,000 to <1/1,000); very rare (<1/10,000) including isolated reports.

Within each frequency grouping, adverse reactions are presented in order of decreasing seriousness.

Table 3: Very common ADRs in study PA.3 (100 mg cohort)

* Severe infections, with or without neutropenia, have included pneumonia, sepsis, and cellulitis.

** Can lead to dehydration, hypokalemia and renal failure.

*** Rash included dermatitis acneiform.

Other Observations

Safety evaluation of Erleva is based on the data from more than 1500 patients treated with at least one 150 mg dose of Erleva monotherapy and more than 300 patients who received Erleva 100 or 150 mg in combination with gemcitabine.

The following adverse reactions have been observed in patients who received Erleva administered as single agent and patients who received Erleva concurrently with chemotherapy.

Very common ADRs from the BR 21 and PA 3 studies are presented in Tables 1 and 3, other ADRs including those from other studies are summarized in Table 4.

Within each frequency grouping, adverse reactions are presented in order of decreasing seriousness

Table 4: Summary of ADRs per frequency category:

¹ In clinical study PA.3.

² Including in-growing eyelashes, excessive growth and thickening of the eyelashes.

³ Including fatalities, in patients receiving Erleva for treatment of NSCLC or other advanced solid tumours. A higher incidence has been observed in patients in Japan.

⁴ In clinical studies, some cases have been associated with concomitant warfarin administration and some with concomitant NSAID administration.

⁵ Including increased alanine aminotransferase [ALT], aspartate aminotransferase [AST] and bilirubin. These were very common in clinical study PA.3 and common in clinical study BR.21. Cases were mainly mild to moderate in severity, transient in nature or associated with liver metastases.

⁶ Including fatalities. Confounding factors included pre-existing liver disease or concomitant hepatotoxic medications.

⁷ Including fatalities.

Reporting of suspected adverse reactions

Reporting suspected adverse reactions after authorisation of the medicinal product is important. It allows continued monitoring of the benefit/risk balance of the medicinal product. Healthcare professionals are asked to report any suspected adverse reactions via (see details below):

Ireland

HPRA Pharmacovigilance

Earlsfort Terrace

IRL - Dublin 2

Tel: +353 1 6764971

Fax: +353 1 6762517

Website: www.hpra.ie

e-mail: [email protected]

Malta

ADR Reporting

Website: www.medicinesauthority.gov.mt/adrportal

United Kingdom

Yellow Card Scheme

Website: www.mhra.gov.uk/yellowcard or search for MHRA Yellow Card in the Google Play or Apple App Store

Symptoms

Single oral doses of Erleva up to 1000 mg erlotinib in healthy subjects, and up to 1600 mg in cancer patients have been tolerated. Repeated twice daily doses of 200 mg in healthy subjects were poorly tolerated after only a few days of dosing. Based on the data from these studies, severe adverse reactions such as diarrhoea, rash and possibly increased activity of liver aminotransferases may occur above the recommended dose.

Management

In case of suspected overdose, Erleva should be withheld and symptomatic treatment initiated.

Pharmacotherapeutic group: antineoplastic agent protein kinase inhibitor, ATC code: L01XE03

Mechanism of action

Erlotinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor type 1 (EGFR also known as HER1) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Erlotinib potently inhibits the intracellular phosphorylation of EGFR. EGFR is expressed on the cell surface of normal cells and cancer cells. In non-clinical models, inhibition of EGFR phosphotyrosine results in cell stasis and/or death.

EGFR mutations may lead to constitutive activation of anti-apoptotic and proliferation signaling pathways. The potent effectiveness of erlotinib in blocking EGFR-mediated signalling in these EGFR mutation positive tumours is attributed to the tight binding of erlotinib to the ATP-binding site in the mutated kinase domain of the EGFR. Due to the blocking of downstream-signaling, the proliferation of cells is stopped, and cell death is induced through the intrinsic apoptotic pathway. Tumour regression is observed in mouse models of enforced expression of these EGFR activating mutations.

Clinical efficacy

- First-line Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) therapy for patients with EGFR activating mutations (Erleva administered as monotherapy)

The efficacy of Erleva in first-line treatment of patients with EGFR activating mutations in NSCLC was demonstrated in a phase III, randomized, open-label trial (ML20650, EURTAC). This study was conducted in Caucasian patients with metastatic or locally advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB and IV) who have not received previous chemotherapy or any systemic antitumour therapy for their advanced disease and who present mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of the EGFR (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 mutation). Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Erleva 150 mg daily or up to 4 cycles of platinum based doublet chemotherapy.

The primary endpoint was investigator assessed PFS. The efficacy results are summarized in Table 5.

Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier curve for investigator assessed PFS in trial ML20650 (EURTAC) (April 2012 cut-off)

Table 5: Efficacy results of Erleva versus chemotherapy in trial ML20650 (EURTAC)

CR=complete response; PR=partial response

* A 58% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death was observed

** Overall concordance rate between investigator and IRC assessment was 70%

*** A high crossover was observed with 82% of the patients in the chemotherapy arm receiving subsequent therapy with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor and all but 2 of those patients had subsequent Erleva.

- Maintenance NSCLC therapy after first-line chemotherapy (Erleva administered as monotherapy)

The efficacy and safety of Erleva as maintenance after first-line chemotherapy for NSCLC was investigated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (BO18192, SATURN). This study was conducted in 889 patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who did not progress after 4 cycles of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Erleva 150 mg or placebo orally once daily until disease progression. The primary endpoint of the study included progression free survival (PFS) in all patients. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. Patients with ECOG PS>1, significant hepatic or renal co-morbidities were not included in the study.

In this study, the overall population showed a benefit for the primary PFS end-point (HR= 0.71 p< 0.0001) and the secondary OS end-point (HR= 0.81 p=0.0088). However the largest benefit was observed in a predefined exploratory analysis in patients with EGFR activating mutations (n= 49) demonstrating a substantial PFS benefit (HR=0.10, 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.25; p<0.0001) and an overall survival HR of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.34 to 2.02). 67% of placebo patients in the EGFR mutation positive subgroup received second or further line treatment with EGFR-TKIs.

The BO25460 (IUNO) study was conducted in 643 patients with advanced NSCLC whose tumors did not harbor an EGFR-activating mutation (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R mutation) and who had not experienced disease progression after four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy.

The objective of the study was to compare the overall survival of first line maintenance therapy with erlotinib versus erlotinib administered at the time of disease progression. The study did not meet its primary endpoint. OS of Erleva in first line maintenance was not superior to Erleva as second line treatment in patients whose tumor did not harbor an EGFR-activating mutation (HR= 1.02, 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.22, p=0.82). The secondary endpoint of PFS showed no difference between Erleva and placebo in maintenance treatment (HR=0.94, 95 % CI, 0.80 to 1.11; p=0.48).

Based on the data from the BO25460 (IUNO) study, Erleva use is not recommended for first-line maintenance treatment in patients without an EGFR activating mutation.

- NSCLC treatment after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen (Erleva administered as monotherapy)

The efficacy and safety of Erleva as second/third-line therapy was demonstrated in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (BR.21), in 731 patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after failure of at least one chemotherapy regimen. Patients were randomised 2:1 to receive Erleva 150 mg or placebo orally once daily. Study endpoints included overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, duration of response, time to deterioration of lung cancer-related symptoms (cough, dyspnoea and pain), and safety. The primary endpoint was survival.

Demographic characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment groups. About two-thirds of the patients were male and approximately one-third had a baseline ECOG performance status (PS) of 2, and 9% had a baseline ECOG PS of 3. Ninety-three percent and 92% of all patients in the Erleva and placebo groups, respectively, had received a prior platinum-containing regimen and 36% and 37% of all patients, respectively, had received a prior taxane therapy.

The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death in the Erleva group relative to the placebo group was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87) (p = 0.001). The percent of patients alive at 12 months was 31.2% and 21.5%, for the Erleva and placebo groups, respectively. The median overall survival was 6.7 months in the Erleva group (95% CI, 5.5 to 7.8 months) compared with 4.7 months in the placebo group (95% CI, 4.1 to 6.3 months).

The effect on overall survival was explored across different patient subsets. The effect of Erleva on overall survival was similar in patients with a baseline performance status (ECOG) of 2-3 (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) or 0-1 (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.6-0.9), male (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) or female patients (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.6-1.1), patients < 65 years of age (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) or older patients (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.6-1.0), patients with one prior regimen (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) or more than one prior regimen (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.6-1.0), Caucasian (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) or Asian patients (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.4-1.0), patients with adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) or squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.5-0.9), but not in patients with other histologies (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.7-1.5), patients with stage IV disease at diagnosis (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.7-1.2) or < stage IV disease at diagnosis (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.5-0.8). Patients who never smoked had a much greater benefit from erlotinib (survival HR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.28-0.64) compared with current or ex-smokers (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.71-1.05).

In the 45% of patients with known EGFR-expression status, the hazard ratio was 0.68 (95% CI 0.49-0.94) for patients with EGFR-positive tumours and 0.93 (95% CI 0.63-1.36) for patients with EGFR-negative tumours (defined by IHC using EGFR pharmDx kit and defining EGFR-negative as less than 10% tumour cells staining). In the remaining 55% of patients with unknown EGFR-expression status, the hazard ratio was 0.77 (95% CI 0.61-0.98).

The median PFS was 9.7 weeks in the Erleva group (95% CI, 8.4 to 12.4 weeks) compared with 8.0 weeks in the placebo group (95% CI, 7.9 to 8.1 weeks).

The objective response rate by RECIST in the Erleva group was 8.9% (95% CI, 6.4 to 12.0).

The first 330 patients were centrally assessed (response rate 6.2%); 401 patients were investigator-assessed (response rate 11.2%).

The median duration of response was 34.3 weeks, ranging from 9.7 to 57.6+ weeks. The proportion of patients who experienced complete response, partial response or stable disease was 44.0% and 27.5%, respectively, for the Erleva and placebo groups (p = 0.004).

A survival benefit of Erleva was also observed in patients who did not achieve an objective tumour response (by RECIST). This was evidenced by a hazard ratio for death of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99) among patients whose best response was stable disease or progressive disease.

Erleva resulted in symptom benefits by significantly prolonging time to deterioration in cough, dyspnoea and pain, versus placebo.

-Pancreatic cancer (Erleva administered concurrently with gemcitabine in study PA.3)

The efficacy and safety of Erleva in combination with gemcitabine as a first-line treatment was assessed in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients were randomised to receive Erleva or placebo once daily on a continuous schedule plus gemcitabine IV (1000 mg/m², Cycle 1 - Days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36 and 43 of an 8 week cycle; Cycle 2 and subsequent cycles - Days 1, 8 and 15 of a 4 week cycle [approved dose and schedule for pancreatic cancer, see the gemcitabine SPC]). Erleva or placebo was taken orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

Baseline demographic and disease characteristics of the patients were similar between the 2 treatment groups, 100 mg Erleva plus gemcitabine or placebo plus gemcitabine, except for a slightly larger proportion of females in the erlotinib/gemcitabine arm compared with the placebo/gemcitabine arm:

Survival was evaluated in the intent-to-treat population based on follow-up survival data. Results are shown in the table below (results for the group of metastatic and locally advanced patients are derived from exploratory subgroup analysis).

In a post-hoc analysis, patients with favourable clinical status at baseline (low pain intensity, good QoL and good PS) may derive more benefit from Erleva. The benefit is mostly driven by the presence of a low pain intensity score.

In a post-hoc analysis, patients on Erleva who developed a rash had a longer overall survival compared to patients who did not develop rash (median OS 7.2 months vs 5 months, HR:0.61).

90% of patients on Erleva developed rash within the first 44 days. The median time to onset of rash was 10 days.

Paediatric population

Absorption

After oral administration, erlotinib peak plasma levels are obtained in approximately 4 hours after oral dosing. A study in normal healthy volunteers provided an estimate of the absolute bioavailability of 59%. The exposure after an oral dose may be increased by food.

Distribution

Erlotinib has a mean apparent volume of distribution of 232 l and distributes into tumour tissue of humans. In a study of 4 patients (3 with non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], and 1 with laryngeal cancer) receiving 150 mg daily oral doses of Erleva, tumour samples from surgical excisions on Day 9 of treatment revealed tumour concentrations of erlotinib that averaged 1185 ng/g of tissue. This corresponded to an overall average of 63% (range 5-161%) of the steady state observed peak plasma concentrations. The primary active metabolites were present in tumour at concentrations averaging 160 ng/g tissue, which corresponded to an overall average of 113% (range 88-130%) of the observed steady state peak plasma concentrations. Plasma protein binding is approximately 95%. Erlotinib binds to serum albumin and alpha-1 acid glycoprotein (AAG).

Biotransformation

Erlotinib is metabolised in the liver by the hepatic cytochromes in humans, primarily CYP3A4 and to a lesser extent by CYP1A2. Extrahepatic metabolism by CYP3A4 in intestine, CYP1A1 in lung, and 1B1 in tumour tissue potentially contribute to the metabolic clearance of erlotinib.

There are three main metabolic pathways identified: 1) O-demethylation of either side chain or both, followed by oxidation to the carboxylic acids; 2) oxidation of the acetylene moiety followed by hydrolysis to the aryl carboxylic acid; and 3) aromatic hydroxylation of the phenyl-acetylene moiety. The primary metabolites OSI-420 and OSI-413 of erlotinib produced by O-demethylation of either side chain have comparable potency to erlotinib in non-clinical in vitro assays and in vivo tumour models. They are present in plasma at levels that are <10% of erlotinib and display similar pharmacokinetics as erlotinib.

Elimination

Erlotinib is excreted predominantly as metabolites via the faeces (>90%) with renal elimination accounting for only a small amount (approximately 9%) of an oral dose. Less than 2% of the orally administered dose is excreted as parent substance. A population pharmacokinetic analysis in 591 patients receiving single agent Erleva shows a mean apparent clearance of 4.47 l/hour with a median half-life of 36.2 hours. Therefore, the time to reach steady state plasma concentration would be expected to occur in approximately 7-8 days.

Pharmacokinetics in special populations

Based on population pharmacokinetic analysis, no clinically significant relationship between predicted apparent clearance and patient age, bodyweight, gender and ethnicity were observed. Patient factors, which correlated with erlotinib pharmacokinetics, were serum total bilirubin, AAG and current smoking. Increased serum concentrations of total bilirubin and AAG concentrations were associated with a reduced erlotinib clearance. The clinical relevance of these differences is unclear. However, smokers had an increased rate of erlotinib clearance. This was confirmed in a pharmacokinetic study in non-smoking and currently cigarette smoking healthy subjects receiving a single oral dose of 150 mg erlotinib. The geometric mean of the C_max was 1056 ng/mL in the non-smokers and 689 ng/mL in the smokers with a mean ratio for smokers to non-smokers of 65.2% (95% CI: 44.3 to 95.9, p = 0.031). The geometric mean of the AUC_0-inf was 18726 ng-h/mL in the non-smokers and 6718 ng-h/mL in the smokers with a mean ratio of 35.9% (95% CI: 23.7 to 54.3, p < 0.0001). The geometric mean of the C_24h was 288 ng/mL in the non-smokers and 34.8 ng/mL in the smokers with a mean ratio of 12.1% (95% CI: 4.82 to 30.2, p = 0.0001).

In the pivotal Phase III NSCLC trial, current smokers achieved erlotinib steady state trough plasma concentration of 0.65 µg/mL (n=16) which was approximately 2-fold less than the former smokers or patients who had never smoked (1.28 µg/mL, n=108). This effect was accompanied by a 24% increase in apparent erlotinib plasma clearance. In a phase I dose escalation study in NSCLC patients who were current smokers, pharmacokinetic analyses at steady-state indicated a dose proportional increase in erlotinib exposure when the Erleva dose was increased from 150 mg to the maximum tolerated dose of 300 mg. Steady-state trough plasma concentrations at a 300 mg dose in current smokers in this study was 1.22 µg/mL (n=17).

Based on the results of pharmacokinetic studies, current smokers should be advised to stop smoking while taking Erleva, as plasma concentrations could be reduced otherwise.

Based on population pharmacokinetic analysis, the presence of an opioid appeared to increase exposure by about 11%.

A second population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted that incorporated erlotinib data from 204 pancreatic cancer patients who received erlotinib plus gemcitabine. This analysis demonstrated that covariants affecting erlotinib clearance in patients from the pancreatic study were very similar to those seen in the prior single agent pharmacokinetic analysis. No new covariate effects were identified. Co-administration of gemcitabine had no effect on erlotinib plasma clearance.

Paediatric population

There have been no specific studies in paediatric patients.

Elderly population

There have been no specific studies in elderly patients.

Hepatic impairment

Erlotinib is primarily cleared by the liver. In patients with solid tumours and with moderately impaired hepatic function (Child-Pugh score 7-9), geometric mean erlotinib AUC_0-t and C_max was 27000 ng-h/mL and 805 ng/mL, respectively, as compared to 29300 ng-h/mL and 1090 ng/mL in patients with adequate hepatic function including patients with primary liver cancer or hepatic metastases. Although the C_max was statistically significant lower in moderately hepatic impaired patients, this difference is not considered clinically relevant. No data are available regarding the influence of severe hepatic dysfunction on the pharmacokinetics of erlotinib. In population pharmacokinetic analysis, increased serum concentrations of total bilirubin were associated with a slower rate of erlotinib clearance.

Renal impairment

Erlotinib and its metabolites are not significantly excreted by the kidney, as less than 9% of a single dose is excreted in the urine. In population pharmacokinetic analysis, no clinically significant relationship was observed between erlotinib clearance and creatinine clearance, but there are no data available for patients with creatinine clearance <15 ml/min.

Chronic dosing effects observed in at least one animal species or study included effects on the cornea (atrophy, ulceration), skin (follicular degeneration and inflammation, redness, and alopecia), ovary (atrophy), liver (liver necrosis), kidney (renal papillary necrosis and tubular dilatation), and gastrointestinal tract (delayed gastric emptying and diarrhoea). Red blood cell parameters were decreased and white blood cells, primarily neutrophils, were increased. There were treatment-related increases in ALT, AST and bilirubin. These findings were observed at exposures well below clinically relevant exposures.

Based on the mode of action, erlotinib has the potential to be a teratogen. Data from reproductive toxicology tests in rats and rabbits at doses near the maximum tolerated dose and/or maternally toxic doses showed reproductive (embryotoxicity in rats, embryo resorption and foetotoxicity in rabbits) and developmental (decrease in pup growth and survival in rats) toxicity, but was not teratogenic and did not impair fertility. These findings were observed at clinically relevant exposures.

Erlotinib tested negative in conventional genotoxicity studies. Two-year carcinogenicity studies with erlotinib conducted in rats and mice were negative up to exposures exceeding human therapeutic exposure (up to 2-fold and 10-fold higher, respectively, based on C_max and/or AUC).

A mild phototoxic skin reaction was observed in rats after UV irradiation.

Not applicable.

No special requirements for disposal.

Any unused medicinal product or waste material should be disposed of in accordance with local requirements.