Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status and history of brain metastases. Patients in the chemotherapy arm could cross over to amivantamab monotherapy every 3 weeks after blinded independent central review–confirmed progression.
The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. OS was a key secondary end point tested hierarchically after PFS and objective response rate, and the trial was estimated to have approximately 56% power to detect a statistically significant OS difference, with power further attenuated by crossover. Other prespecified end points included IPCW crossover-adjusted OS, PFS2, safety, and patient-reported outcomes.
At the data cutoff, 18 patients (12%) in the amivantamab arm remained on treatment versus none in the chemotherapy arm; 87 chemotherapy-arm patients crossed over on protocol and 10 received amivantamab off protocol. Among patients who received a first subsequent therapy, 97 of 129 in the chemotherapy arm received amivantamab, whereas 31 of 83 in the amivantamab arm received another EGFR-targeted or TKI-based regimen, including sunvozertinib (Zegfrovy), mobocertinib, and zipalertinib.
Investigators attributed the difference to the crossover design and the lack of active second-line options when the trial was conducted.
PAPILLON Final OS Data
- Median OS was 34.3 versus 27.9 months in the ITT population (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66 - 1.14; P = .307), with 76% of eligible chemotherapy-arm patients crossing over to amivantamab.
- IPCW crossover-adjusted analysis: HR, 0.57 (95% CI, 0.35 - 0.77; nominal P = .002); two-stage estimation HR, 0.54.
- Median PFS2 was 28.3 versus 17.5 months (HR, 0.59), and time to subsequent therapy was 16.9 versus 9.9 months (HR, 0.37).
- Safety was consistent with prior intravenous amivantamab reports, before subcutaneous dosing and prophylactic strategies were implemented.
How Did OS Compare Across Subgroups and Sensitivity Analyses?
OS results generally favored amivantamab plus chemotherapy across predefined subgroups, although investigators cautioned that subgroup analyses were not part of hypothesis testing.
Hazard ratios were as follows for key demographics:
- 0.58 (95% CI, 0.40 - 0.84) in female patients versus 1.33 (95% CI, 0.88 - 2.01) in male patients
- 0.63 (95% CI, 0.44-0.91) in never-smokers versus 1.22 (95% CI, 0.81-1.85) in patients with a smoking history
- 0.82 (95% CI, 0.60-1.13) in patients without a history of brain metastases versus 0.97 (95% CI, 0.57-1.62) in those with
- 0.90 (95% CI, 0.63-1.28) in Asian versuss 0.74 (95% CI, 0.47 - 1.17) in non-Asian patients.
Landmark OS rates were 66% versus 58% at 2 years, and 47% versus 38% at 3 years.
Two additional crossover-adjustment models were consistent with IPCW: two-stage estimation yielded an HR of 0.54 (95% CI, 0.38 - 0.77), and rank-preserving structural failure time yielded an HR of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.37 - 1.36).
Time to treatment discontinuation was 14.1 versus 7.6 months (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.28 - 0.46; P <.0001), and time to subsequent therapy was 16.9 versus 9.9 months (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.29 - 0.48; P <.0001).
What Were the Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes?
Median treatment duration was 13.4 months with amivantamab plus chemotherapy (n = 151) versus 6.9 months with chemotherapy (n = 155), and no new safety signals were identified. T
he most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) with the combination were paronychia (60%), neutropenia (60%), rash (58%), anemia (53%), hypoalbuminemia (46%), and infusion-related reactions (44%).
The most common grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (34% vs 23% with chemotherapy), rash (15% vs 0%), anemia (13% vs 13%), leukopenia (11% vs 3%), paronychia (10% vs 0%), and thrombocytopenia (10% vs 10%).
Investigators noted that the trial predated subcutaneous amivantamab and prophylactic strategies for dermatologic and infusion-related AEs.
Time to worsening on EORTC QLQ-C30 symptom scales favored the combination for nausea and vomiting (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58 - 0.98), pain (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 - 0.96), dyspnea (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51 - 0.90), insomnia (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 - 0.93), and diarrhea (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 - 0.96). Time to symptomatic progression was 28.8 versus 22.4 months (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59 - 1.01; P = .055).
References
- Kim C, Tang KJ, Cho BC, et al. First-line amivantamab-chemotherapy vs chemotherapy in NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions: overall survival from PAPILLON. Presented at: International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) 2026 World Conference on Lung Cancer; September 12-15, 2026; Seoul, South Korea. Abstract PL03.03.
- In the PAPILLON study, first-line amivantamab-chemotherapy demonstrates the longest overall survival reported for EGFR exon 20 insertion-positive advanced NSCLC. News release. International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. September 14, 2026. Accessed September 14, 2026.
- Zipalertinib Plus Chemotherapy Improves PFS in First-Line EGFR Exon 20 Insertion+ NSCLC. OncLive. Published August 13, 2026. Accessed September 14, 2026. https://www.onclive.com/view/zipalertinib-plus-chemotherapy-improves-pfs-in-first-line-egfr-exon-20-insertion-nsclc
- Dr Raez on Oral Options Reshaping ROS1+, HER2-Mutant, and EGFR Exon 20+ NSCLC. OncLive. Published September 14, 2026. Accessed September 14, 2026. https://www.onclive.com/view/dr-raez-on-oral-options-reshaping-ros1-her2-mutant-and-egfr-exon-20-nsclc