Search

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported .Tarlatamab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy targeting delta-like ligand 3, has shown durable anticancer activity and manageable safety in previously treated small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in DeLLphi-300 phase I and DeLLphi-301 phase II trials. Here, we report extended follow-up of DeLLphi-300 (median follow-up, 12.1 months [range, 0.2-34.3]) in fully enrolled cohorts treated with tarlatamab ≥10 mg dose administered once every two weeks, once every three weeks, or once on day 1 and once on day 8 of a 21-day cycle (N = 152). Overall, the objective response rate (ORR) was 25.0%; the median duration of response (mDOR) was 11.2 months (95% CI, 6.6 to 22.3), and the median overall survival (mOS) was 17.5 months (95% CI, 11.4 to not estimable [NE]). Among 17 patients receiving 10 mg tarlatamab once every two weeks, the ORR was 35.3%, the mDOR was 14.9 months (95% CI, 3.0 to NE), the mOS was 20.3 months (95% CI, 5.1 to NE), and 29.4% had sustained disease control with time on treatment ≥52 weeks. No new safety signals were identified. In modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases analyses, CNS tumor shrinkage of ≥30% was observed in 62.5% of patients (10 of 16) who had a baseline CNS lesion of ≥10 mm, including in a subset of patients with tumor shrinkage long after previous brain radiotherapy. In DeLLphi-300 extended follow-up, tarlatamab demonstrated unprecedented survival and potential findings of intracranial activity in previously treated SCLC.

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer with driver alterations., Methods: This ASCO living guideline offers continually updated recommendations based on an ongoing systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with the latest time frame spanning February to October 2023. An Expert Panel of medical oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations., Results: This guideline consolidates all previous updates and reflects the body of evidence informing this guideline topic. Eight new RCTs were identified in the latest search of the literature to date., Recommendations: Evidence-based recommendations were updated to address first, second, and subsequent treatment options for patients based on targetable driver alterations.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/living-guidelines.

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver alterations., Methods: This ASCO living guideline offers continually updated recommendations based on an ongoing systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with the latest time frame spanning February to October 2023. An Expert Panel of medical oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations., Results: This guideline consolidates all previous updates and reflects the body of evidence informing this guideline topic. Ten new RCTs were identified in the latest search of the literature to date., Recommendations: Evidence-based recommendations were updated to address first, second, and subsequent treatment options for patients without driver alterations.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/living-guidelines.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically on the based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We present 5-year outcomes from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02578680). Eligible patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations were randomly assigned 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles with pemetrexed and investigator's choice of carboplatin/cisplatin for four cycles, followed by maintenance pemetrexed until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 616 randomly assigned patients (n = 410, pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum; n = 206, placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum), median time from random assignment to data cutoff (March 8, 2022) was 64.6 (range, 60.1-72.4) months. Hazard ratio (95% CI) for OS was 0.60 (0.50 to 0.72) and PFS was 0.50 (0.42 to 0.60) for pembrolizumab plus platinum-pemetrexed versus placebo plus platinum-pemetrexed. 5-year OS rates were 19.4% versus 11.3%. Toxicity was manageable. Among 57 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab, objective response rate was 86.0% and 3-year OS rate after completing 35 cycles (approximately 5 years after random assignment) was 71.9%. Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum maintained OS and PFS benefits versus placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum, regardless of programmed cell death ligand-1 expression. These data continue to support pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum as a standard of care in previously untreated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations.

Purpose: In KEYNOTE-189, first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report an updated analysis from KEYNOTE-189 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02578680)., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive pemetrexed and platinum plus pembrolizumab (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then pemetrexed maintenance plus pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles. Eligible patients with disease progression in the placebo-combination group could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy. Response was assessed per RECIST (version 1.1) by central review. No alpha was assigned to this updated analysis., Results: As of September 21, 2018 (median follow-up, 23.1 months), the updated median (95% CI) OS was 22.0 (19.5 to 25.2) months in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 10.7 (8.7 to 13.6) months in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 9.0 (8.1 to 9.9) months and 4.9 (4.7 to 5.5) months, respectively (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.58). Median (95% CI) time from randomization to objective tumor progression on next-line treatment or death from any cause, whichever occurred first (progression-free-survival-2; PFS-2) was 17.0 (15.1 to 19.4) months and 9.0 (7.6 to 10.4) months, respectively (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.59). OS and PFS benefits with pembrolizumab were observed regardless of PD-L1 expression or presence of liver/brain metastases. Incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar in the pembrolizumab-combination (71.9%) and placebo-combination (66.8%) groups., Conclusion: First-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to demonstrate substantially improved OS and PFS in metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression or liver/brain metastases, with manageable safety and tolerability.

Purpose: Antiangiogenic agents combined with chemotherapy have efficacy in the treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Cediranib (AstraZeneca, Cheshire, United Kingdom), a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and platelet-derived growth factor receptor inhibitor, demonstrated therapeutic potential in a prior phase I trial. We evaluated a phase II trial for efficacy., Patients and Methods: SWOG S0905 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01064648) randomly assigned cediranib or placebo with platinum-pemetrexed for six cycles followed by maintenance cediranib or placebo in unresectable chemotherapy-naïve patients with MPM of any histologic subtype. Primary end point was Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, PFS by modified RECIST v1.1, response (modified RECIST and RECIST v1.1), disease control, and safety/toxicity. The trial was designed to detect a difference in RECIST v1.1 PFS at the one-sided 0.1 level using a stratified log-rank test., Results: Ninety-two eligible patients were enrolled (75% epithelioid and 25% biphasic or sarcomatoid). The cediranib arm had more grade 3 and 4 diarrhea, dehydration, hypertension, and weight loss. Cediranib improved PFS by RECIST v1.1 (hazard ratio, 0.71; 80% CI, 0.54 to 0.95; P = .062; 7.2 months v 5.6 months) and increased modified RECIST v1.1 response (50% v 20%; P = .006). By modified RECIST v1.1, cediranib numerically increased PFS (hazard ratio, 0.77; 80% CI, 0.59 to 1.02; P = .12; median, 6.9 months v 5.6 months). No significant difference in overall survival was observed., Conclusion: The addition of cediranib to platinum-pemetrexed improved PFS by RECIST v1.1 and response rate by modified RECIST in patients with unresectable MPM. Whereas adding antiangiogenics to chemotherapy has been a successful strategy for some patients, the cediranib toxicity profile and small incremental survival benefit precludes additional development in MPM.

Purpose: Health providers' implicit racial bias negatively affects communication and patient reactions to many medical interactions. However, its effects on racially discordant oncology interactions are largely unknown. Thus, we examined whether oncologist implicit racial bias has similar effects in oncology interactions. We further investigated whether oncologist implicit bias negatively affects patients' perceptions of recommended treatments (i.e., degree of confidence, expected difficulty). We predicted oncologist implicit bias would negatively affect communication, patient reactions to interactions, and, indirectly, patient perceptions of recommended treatments., Methods: Participants were 18 non-black medical oncologists and 112 black patients. Oncologists completed an implicit racial bias measure several weeks before video-recorded treatment discussions with new patients. Observers rated oncologist communication and recorded interaction length of time and amount of time oncologists and patients spoke. Following interactions, patients answered questions about oncologists' patient-centeredness and difficulty remembering contents of the interaction, distress, trust, and treatment perceptions., Results: As predicted, oncologists higher in implicit racial bias had shorter interactions, and patients and observers rated these oncologists' communication as less patient-centered and supportive. Higher implicit bias also was associated with more patient difficulty remembering contents of the interaction. In addition, oncologist implicit bias indirectly predicted less patient confidence in recommended treatments, and greater perceived difficulty completing them, through its impact on oncologists' communication (as rated by both patients and observers)., Conclusion: Oncologist implicit racial bias is negatively associated with oncologist communication, patients' reactions to racially discordant oncology interactions, and patient perceptions of recommended treatments. These perceptions could subsequently directly affect patient-treatment decisions. Thus, implicit racial bias is a likely source of racial treatment disparities and must be addressed in oncology training and practice., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: We assessed whether chemotherapy selection based on in situ ERCC1 and RRM1 protein levels would improve survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to the trial's experimental arm, which consisted of gemcitabine/carboplatin if RRM1 and ERCC1 were low, docetaxel/carboplatin if RRM1 was high and ERCC1 was low, gemcitabine/docetaxel if RRM1 was low and ERCC1 was high, and docetaxel/vinorelbine if both were high. In the control arm, patients received gemcitabine/carboplatin. The trial was powered for a 32% improvement in 6-month progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Of 331 patients registered, 275 were eligible. The median number of cycles given was four in both arms. A tumor rebiopsy specifically for expression analysis was required in 17% of patients. The median time from informed consent to expression analysis was 11 days. We found no statistically significant differences between the experimental arm and the control arm in PFS (6.1 months v 6.9 months) or overall survival (11.0 months v 11.3 months). A subset analysis revealed that patients with low levels for both proteins who received the same treatment in both treatment arms had a statistically better PFS (P = .02) in the control arm (8.1 months) compared with the experimental arm (5.0 months)., Conclusion: This demonstrates that protein expression analysis for therapeutic decision making is feasible in newly diagnosed patients with advanced-stage NSCLC. A tumor rebiopsy is safe, required in 17%, and acceptable to 89% (47 of 53) of patients.

Purpose: This phase I study assessed the safety, optimally tolerated regimen (OTR), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary clinical activity of lapatinib and docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Doses of lapatinib (oral once daily, continuous) and docetaxel (intravenous, every 3 weeks) were escalated in cohorts of at least three patients based on dose-limiting toxicities in the first treatment cycle until the OTR was reached. The protocol was amended to include pegfilgrastim because of dose-limiting toxicity (neutropenia), and a second dose-escalation phase was conducted to determine the OTR for the combination of docetaxel, lapatinib, and pegfilgrastim. After the determination of the OTR, the pharmacokinetics of lapatinib and docetaxel were determined to estimate the potential for an interaction between docetaxel and lapatinib at the OTR dose level., Results: Fifty-two patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled. The OTR dose level for lapatinib and docetaxel with pegfilgrastim was 1,250 mg (once daily) and 75 mg/m(2) (once every 3 weeks), respectively. Overall, adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in severity. The drug-related AEs reported by most patients (>or= 25%) were diarrhea (56%), rash (52%), fatigue (27%), and nausea (25%). Of 43 patients assessable for clinical response, two patients had confirmed partial responses. The pharmacokinetics of lapatinib (area under the curve, maximum serum concentration) and docetaxel (area under the curve, clearance) in combination were not significantly different than when the drugs are administered separately., Conclusion: The combination of docetaxel and lapatinib with pegfilgrastim was well tolerated. No pharmacokinetic interaction was observed. Clinical activity was seen in this phase I drug combination trial.

Purpose: Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 and epidermal growth factor receptor kinase activity. The activity of vandetanib plus docetaxel was assessed in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: This two-part study comprised an open-label run-in phase and a double-blind randomized phase. Eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC after failure of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary objective of the randomized phase was to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in patients receiving vandetanib (100 or 300 mg/d) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenous infusion every 21 days) versus placebo plus docetaxel. The study was designed to have more than 75% power to detect 50% prolongation at a one-sided significance level of P < .20. Secondary objectives included objective response rate, overall survival, safety and tolerability., Results: In the randomized phase (n = 127), median PFS was 18.7 weeks for vandetanib 100 mg plus docetaxel (n = 42; hazard ratio v docetaxel = 0.64; one-sided P = .037); 17.0 weeks for vandetanib 300 mg plus docetaxel (n = 44; hazard ratio v docetaxel = 0.83; one-sided P = .231); and 12 weeks for docetaxel (n = 41). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival among the three treatment arms. Common adverse events included diarrhea, rash, and asymptomatic prolongation of corrected QT (QTC) interval., Conclusion: The primary objective was achieved, with vandetanib 100 mg plus docetaxel demonstrating a significant prolongation of PFS compared with docetaxel in relation to the prespecified significance level. On the basis of these encouraging data, phase III evaluation of vandetanib 100 mg plus docetaxel in second-line NSCLC has been initiated.

Purpose: This phase I study was undertaken to define the toxicity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and clinical activity of CI-1040, a small-molecule inhibitor of the dual-specificity kinases MEK(mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase) -1 and MEK2 , in patients with advanced malignancy., Patients and Methods: CI-1040 was tested in multiple daily dosing frequencies administered for 21 days repeated every 28 days leading ultimately to continuous administration, and effect of food on absorption was tested. Single dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics were assessed during cycle 1 and phosphorylated extracellular receptor kinase (pERK) levels were assessed in WBCs and also in tumor tissue from selected patients., Results: Seventy-seven patients received CI-1040 at dose levels ranging from 100 mg QD to 800 mg tid. Grade 3 asthenia was dose limiting at the highest dose level tested, 800 mg tid administered with food. Ninety-eight percent of all drug-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2 in severity; most common toxicities included diarrhea, asthenia, rash, nausea, and vomiting. Plasma concentrations of CI-1040 and its active metabolite, PD 0184264, increased in a less than dose proportional manner from 100 to 800 mg QD. Administration with a high-fat meal resulted in an increase in drug exposure. The MTD and recommended phase II dose was 800 mg BID administered with food. Sixty-six patients were assessable for response. One partial response was achieved in a patient with pancreatic cancer and 19 patients (28%) achieved stable disease lasting a median of 5.5 months (range, 4 to 17 months). Inhibition of tumor pERK (median, 73%; range, 46% to 100%) was demonstrated in 10 patients., Conclusion: CI-1040 was well tolerated at 800 mg BID administered with food. Both target suppression and antitumor activity were demonstrated in this phase I study.

Purpose: A large community-based cancer registry was analyzed to determine if the clinicopathologic characteristics and/or survival rates of lung cancer patients under 50 years of age at diagnosis differ from those of patients 50 years of age or greater at diagnosis., Patients and Methods: Data regarding demographics, stage, histology, initial therapy, and survival were obtained on all patients with primary bronchogenic carcinoma registered in the metropolitan Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry from 1973 to 1992., Results: Of 31,266 patients, 9.0% were under 50 years of age at diagnosis. Females (40.1% v 31.2%; P < .001) and blacks (28.7% v 21.9%, P < .001) were overrepresented in the younger group compared with the older group. Younger patients had a significantly higher incidence of adenocarcinoma and were less likely to present with local-stage disease (18.6% v 25.2%; P < .001). Younger patients were significantly more likely to undergo surgery and/or combined-modality therapy. Relative survival at 5 years was significantly better in the younger group (16.1% v 13.4%; P < .001), mainly because of better survival in patients with local-stage disease (48.7% v 35.4%; P < .001). In a multivariate analysis, advanced-stage, nonsurgical initial therapy, age 50 years or greater at diagnosis, and male gender were independent negative prognostic factors., Conclusion: The overrepresentation of females and blacks in the group of younger patients with lung cancer suggests an increased susceptibility to lung carcinogens in these populations. Overall, this study suggests that lung cancer is not a more aggressive disease in younger patients and that all patients with lung cancer should be managed along the same therapeutic guidelines.