Search

Background: We evaluated whether tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutations have clinical utility as biomarkers for pembrolizumab monotherapy versus platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive (tumor proportion score ≥1%) advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR/ALK alterations in the phase III KEYNOTE-042 trial., Patients and Methods: This retrospective exploratory analysis assessed prevalence of tTMB and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutations determined by whole-exome sequencing of tumor tissue and matched normal DNA and their associations with outcomes in KEYNOTE-042. Clinical utility of tTMB was assessed using a prespecified cut point of 175 mutations/exome., Results: Of 793 patients, 345 (43.5%) had tTMB ≥175 mutations/exome and 448 (56.5%) had tTMB <175 mutations/exome. No association was observed between PD-L1 expression and tTMB. Continuous tTMB score was associated with improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival among patients receiving pembrolizumab (Wald test, one-sided P < 0.001) but not those receiving chemotherapy (Wald test, two-sided P > 0.05). tTMB ≥175 mutations/exome was associated with improved outcomes for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, whereas tTMB <175 mutations/exome was not {OS: hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.80] and 1.09 (95% CI 0.88-1.36); progression-free survival: 0.75 (0.59-0.95) and 1.27 (1.04-1.55), respectively}. Improved OS [hazard ratio (95% CI)] for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy was observed regardless of STK11 [STK11 mutant (n = 33): 0.37 (0.16-0.86), STK11 wild-type (n = 396): 0.83 (0.65-1.05)]; KEAP1 [KEAP1 mutant (n = 64): 0.75 (0.42-1.35), KEAP1 wild-type (n = 365): 0.78 (0.61-0.99)], or KRAS [KRAS mutant (n = 69): 0.42 (0.22-0.81); KRAS wild-type (n = 232): 0.86 (0.63-1.18)] mutation status., Conclusion: tTMB with a cut point of ≥175 mutations/exome is a potential predictive biomarker for pembrolizumab monotherapy for advanced/metastatic PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% NSCLC. Pembrolizumab is a standard first-line treatment in this setting regardless of STK11, KEAP1, or KRAS mutation status., (Copyright © 2023 Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC., a subsidiary Merck & Co., Inc., The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: NEPTUNE, a phase 3, open-label study, evaluated first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC)., Methods: Eligible patients with EGFR and ALK wild-type mNSCLC were randomized (1:1) to first-line durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks until progression) plus tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks for up to four doses) or standard chemotherapy. Randomization was stratified by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 expression (≥25% versus <25%), tumor histologic type, and smoking history. The amended primary end point was overall survival (OS) in patients with blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) greater than or equal to 20 mutations per megabase (mut/Mb). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb and safety and tolerability in all treated patients., Results: As of June 24, 2019, 823 patients were randomized (intention-to-treat [ITT]); 512 (62%) were bTMB-evaluable, with 129 of 512 (25%) having bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb (durvalumab plus tremelimumab [n = 69]; chemotherapy [n = 60]). Baseline characteristics were balanced in the intention-to-treat. Among patients with bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb, OS improvement with durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio 0.71 [95% confidence interval: 0.49-1.05; p = 0.081]; median OS, 11.7 versus 9.1 months); the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.15; median PFS, 4.2 versus 5.1 months). In the overall safety population, incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 20.7% (durvalumab plus tremelimumab) and 33.6% (chemotherapy)., Conclusions: NEPTUNE did not meet its primary end point of improved OS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with mNSCLC and bTMB greater than or equal to 20 mut/Mb. Despite the amended study design, with a resultant small primary analysis population, therapeutic activity was aligned with expectations based on mechanistic biology and previous studies., (Copyright © 2022 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with first-line pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab-chemotherapy, or cetuximab-chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-048 trial (NCT02358031)., Materials and Methods: HRQoL was measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-question quality-of-life (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC 35-question quality-of-life head and neck cancer-specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35), and the EuroQol 5-dimension 3-level instruments (EQ-5D-3L). Secondary endpoints included mean change from baseline in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) at week 15 and time to deterioration (TTD) in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 pain and swallowing., Results: Of 882 enrolled participants, 844 received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment and completed ≥ 1 HRQoL assessment; adherence was ≥ 79% at week 15 across treatment groups. At week 15, EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL scores remained stable; no clinically meaningful between-group differences were observed (least squares mean difference, pembrolizumab vs cetuximab-chemotherapy, 0.24; 95% CI, -3.34 to 3.82; pembrolizumab-chemotherapy vs cetuximab-chemotherapy, 0.40; 95% CI, -3.46 to 4.26). Median TTD in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 pain and swallowing scores was not reached over 51 weeks across groups, showing stable HRQoL. TTD was similar between groups for EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (pembrolizumab vs cetuximab-chemotherapy: HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.95-2.00; pembrolizumab-chemotherapy vs cetuximab-chemotherapy: HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.94-2.00), as was TTD in EORTC QLQ-H&N35 pain and swallowing scores., Conclusions: Pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy extended OS while maintaining HRQoL, further supporting first-line use for R/M HNSCC., (Copyright © 2022 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To characterize the dental adverse events after head and neck radiation therapy (HNRT) and to investigate the impact of regional radiation dose upon tooth loss outcomes., Study Design: A retrospective dosimetric-based analysis was conducted to assess dental events affecting post-HNRT extracted teeth and the impact of 3 different radiation doses (<30 Gy, 30-60 Gy, and >60 Gy) upon tooth loss. In addition, post-HNRT extractions outcomes and mean parotid glands dosimetry and salivary changes were analyzed., Results: Sixty-six patients who underwent HNRT were included in the analysis. Radiation caries was the most frequent (67.8%) post-HNRT dental adverse event, and maxillary molars ipsilateral to the tumor were lost earlier compared with the others (P < .001). The odds ratio for post-HNRT tooth extraction risk was approximately 3-fold higher for teeth exposed to >60 Gy (confidence interval, 1.56-5.35; P < .001), followed by an increased risk of delayed healing and osteoradionecrosis (ORN) in sites receiving doses above 50 Gy., Conclusions: Radiation caries was the major cause of dental extractions after HNRT, and the dosimetric analysis suggested that a high dose of radiation may negatively impact the dentition of survivors of head and neck cancer, increasing the risk of tooth loss and ORN., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Saliva is a biofluid that maintains the health of oral tissues and the homeostasis of oral microbiota. Studies have demonstrated that Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients have different salivary microbiota than healthy individuals. However, the relationship between these microbial differences and clinicopathological outcomes is still far from conclusive. Herein, we investigate the capability of using metagenomic and metaproteomic saliva profiles to distinguish between Control (C), OSCC without active lesion (L0), and OSCC with active lesion (L1) patients. The results show that there are significantly distinct taxonomies and functional changes in L1 patients compared to C and L0 patients, suggesting compositional modulation of the oral microbiome, as the relative abundances of Centipeda, Veillonella, and Gemella suggested by metagenomics are correlated with tumor size, clinical stage, and active lesion. Metagenomics results also demonstrated that poor overall patient survival is associated with a higher relative abundance of Stenophotromonas, Staphylococcus, Centipeda, Selenomonas, Alloscordovia, and Acitenobacter. Finally, compositional and functional differences in the saliva content by metaproteomics analysis can distinguish healthy individuals from OSCC patients. In summary, our study suggests that oral microbiota and their protein abundance have potential diagnosis and prognosis value for oral cancer patients. Further studies are necessary to understand the role of uniquely detected metaproteins in the microbiota of healthy and OSCC patients as well as the crosstalk between saliva host proteins and the oral microbiome present in OSCC., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the frequency of oral leukoplakia and oral erythroplakia in young patients., Study Design: The systematic review was based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and performed in the following electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. The studies included were cross-sectional, cohort, and diagnostic, which provided with clinical and microscopic data of patients younger than 40 years. The Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies were used to assess the risk of bias., Results: Five studies met eligibility criteria and were included. The total number of patients from the studies was 1246, of which 115 were young patients (9.2%) with oral leukoplakia as the only oral potentially malignant disorder reported. Oral epithelial dysplasia was identified in 40 cases (34.7%), of which 8 (6.9%) presented malignant transformation., Conclusions: The frequency of oral leukoplakia is low in young patients. Observational studies are necessary for understanding oral leukoplakia and other oral potentially malignant disorders in younger patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pembrolizumab is active in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression associated with improved response., Methods: KEYNOTE-048 was a randomised, phase 3 study of participants with untreated locally incurable recurrent or metastatic HNSCC done at 200 sites in 37 countries. Participants were stratified by PD-L1 expression, p16 status, and performance status and randomly allocated (1:1:1) to pembrolizumab alone, pembrolizumab plus a platinum and 5-fluorouracil (pembrolizumab with chemotherapy), or cetuximab plus a platinum and 5-fluorouracil (cetuximab with chemotherapy). Investigators and participants were aware of treatment assignment. Investigators, participants, and representatives of the sponsor were masked to the PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) results; PD-L1 positivity was not required for study entry. The primary endpoints were overall survival (time from randomisation to death from any cause) and progression-free survival (time from randomisation to radiographically confirmed disease progression or death from any cause, whichever came first) in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly allocated to a treatment group). There were 14 primary hypotheses: superiority of pembrolizumab alone and of pembrolizumab with chemotherapy versus cetuximab with chemotherapy for overall survival and progression-free survival in the PD-L1 CPS of 20 or more, CPS of 1 or more, and total populations and non-inferiority (non-inferiority margin: 1·2) of pembrolizumab alone and pembrolizumab with chemotherapy versus cetuximab with chemotherapy for overall survival in the total population. The definitive findings for each hypothesis were obtained when statistical testing was completed for that hypothesis; this occurred at the second interim analysis for 11 hypotheses and at final analysis for three hypotheses. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all participants who received at least one dose of allocated treatment). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02358031., Findings: Between April 20, 2015, and Jan 17, 2017, 882 participants were allocated to receive pembrolizumab alone (n=301), pembrolizumab with chemotherapy (n=281), or cetuximab with chemotherapy (n=300); of these, 754 (85%) had CPS of 1 or more and 381 (43%) had CPS of 20 or more. At the second interim analysis, pembrolizumab alone improved overall survival versus cetuximab with chemotherapy in the CPS of 20 or more population (median 14·9 months vs 10·7 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0·61 [95% CI 0·45-0·83], p=0·0007) and CPS of 1 or more population (12·3 vs 10·3, 0·78 [0·64-0·96], p=0·0086) and was non-inferior in the total population (11·6 vs 10·7, 0·85 [0·71-1·03]). Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy improved overall survival versus cetuximab with chemotherapy in the total population (13·0 months vs 10·7 months, HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·63-0·93], p=0·0034) at the second interim analysis and in the CPS of 20 or more population (14·7 vs 11·0, 0·60 [0·45-0·82], p=0·0004) and CPS of 1 or more population (13·6 vs 10·4, 0·65 [0·53-0·80], p<0·0001) at final analysis. Neither pembrolizumab alone nor pembrolizumab with chemotherapy improved progression-free survival at the second interim analysis. At final analysis, grade 3 or worse all-cause adverse events occurred in 164 (55%) of 300 treated participants in the pembrolizumab alone group, 235 (85%) of 276 in the pembrolizumab with chemotherapy group, and 239 (83%) of 287 in the cetuximab with chemotherapy group. Adverse events led to death in 25 (8%) participants in the pembrolizumab alone group, 32 (12%) in the pembrolizumab with chemotherapy group, and 28 (10%) in the cetuximab with chemotherapy group., Interpretation: Based on the observed efficacy and safety, pembrolizumab plus platinum and 5-fluorouracil is an appropriate first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic HNSCC and pembrolizumab monotherapy is an appropriate first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic HNSCC., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In an earlier report of the ASCEND-8 study (open-label, phase I, three-arm study, treatment-naive patients and pre-treated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC), it was shown that ceritinib 450 mg with food had comparable exposure and better gastrointestinal tolerability than 750-mg fasted., Methods: Here, we report efficacy and updated safety data from primary efficacy analysis of the ASCEND-8 study. Key secondary endpoints were overall response rate and duration of response, assessed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1., Results: In total, 306 patients were randomized to ceritinib 450-mg fed (n = 108) or 600-mg fed (n = 87) or 750-mg fasted (n = 111), of which 304 patients were included in safety analysis and 198 treatment-naive patients (ALK receptor tyrosine kinase [ALK]-positive by immunohistochemistry) were included in the efficacy analysis (450-mg fed [n = 73], 600-mg fed [n = 51], and 750-mg fasted [n = 74]). The BIRC-assessed overall response rate was 78.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 66.9-86.9), 72.5% (95% CI: 58.3-84.1), and 75.7% (95% CI: 64.3-84.9), respectively; and the median duration of response (months) by BIRC was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 11.2-NE), 20.7 (95% CI: 15.8-NE), and 15.4 (95% CI: 8.3-NE), respectively. Based on the safety analysis (n = 304), the 450-mg fed arm showed the highest median relative dose intensity (100% versus 78.5% versus 83.7%), lowest proportion of patients with dose reductions (24.1% versus 65.1% versus 60.9%), and lowest proportion of patients with gastrointestinal toxicities (75.9% versus 82.6% versus 91.8%)., Conclusion: Ceritinib at a dose of 450 mg with food compared to 750-mg fasted showed consistent efficacy and less gastrointestinal toxicity., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In the phase II/III KEYNOTE-010 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01905657), pembrolizumab significantly prolonged overall survival over docetaxel in patients with previously treated, programmed death ligand 1-expressing (tumor proportion score ≥ 1%), advanced NSCLC. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results are reported here., Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks. HRQoL was assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLC) Core 30 (C30), EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer 13 (LC13), and EuroQoL-5D. Key analyses included mean baseline-to-week-12 change in global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) score, functioning and symptom domains, and time to deterioration in a QLQ-LC13 composite endpoint of cough, dyspnea, and chest pain., Results: Patient reported outcomes compliance was high across all three instruments. Pembrolizumab was associated with better QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL scores from baseline to 12 weeks than docetaxel, regardless of pembrolizumab dose or tumor proportion score status (not significant). Compared with docetaxel, fewer pembrolizumab-treated patients had "deteriorated" status and more had "improved" status in GHS/QoL. Nominally significant improvement was reported in many EORTC symptom domains with pembrolizumab, and nominally significant worsening was reported with docetaxel. Significant prolongation in true time to deterioration for the QLQ-LC13 composite endpoint emerged for pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg compared to docetaxel (nominal two-sided p = 0.03), but not for the 2-mg/kg dose., Conclusions: These findings suggest that HRQoL and symptoms are maintained or improved to a greater degree with pembrolizumab than with docetaxel in this NSCLC patient population., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In KEYNOTE-010, pembrolizumab versus docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) in patients with programmed death-1 protein (PD)-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prespecified exploratory analysis compared outcomes in patients based on PD-L1 expression in archival versus newly collected tumor samples using recently updated survival data., Patients and Methods: PD-L1 was assessed centrally by immunohistochemistry (22C3 antibody) in archival or newly collected tumor samples. Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg Q3W or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W for 24 months or until progression/intolerable toxicity/other reason. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 9 weeks, survival every 2 months. Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and ≥1%; pembrolizumab doses were pooled in this analysis., Results: At date cut-off of 24 March 2017, median follow-up was 31 months (range 23-41) representing 18 additional months of follow-up from the primary analysis. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel continued to improve OS in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-expressing advanced NSCLC; hazard ratio (HR) was 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57, 0.77]. Of 1033 patients analyzed, 455(44%) were enrolled based on archival samples and 578 (56%) on newly collected tumor samples. Approximately 40% of archival samples and 45% of newly collected tumor samples were PD-L1 TPS ≥50%. For TPS ≥50%, the OS HRs were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.91) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.56) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In patients with TPS ≥1%, OS HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.93) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.48, 0.73) for archival and newly collected samples, respectively. In TPS ≥50%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.63 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.89)] and newly collected samples [0.53 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.72)]. In patients with TPS ≥1%, PFS HRs were similar across archival [0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.02)] and newly collected samples [0.83 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.02)]., Conclusion: Pembrolizumab continued to improve OS over docetaxel in intention to treat population and in subsets of patients with newly collected and archival samples., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01905657., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The efficacy of ceritinib in patients with untreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ceritinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in these patients., Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study in untreated patients with stage IIIB/IV ALK-rearranged non-squamous NSCLC was done in 134 centres across 28 countries. Eligible patients were assigned via interactive response technology to oral ceritinib 750 mg/day or platinum-based chemotherapy ([cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 or carboplatin AUC 5-6 plus pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 ] every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by maintenance pemetrexed); randomisation was stratified by World Health Organization performance status (0 vs 1-2), previous neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, and presence of brain metastases as per investigator's assessment at screening. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was blinded independent review committee assessed progression-free survival, based on all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set). Efficacy analyses were done based on the full analysis set. All safety analyses were done based on the safety set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01828099., Findings: Between Aug 19, 2013, and May 11, 2015, 376 patients were randomly assigned to ceritinib (n=189) or chemotherapy (n=187). Median progression-free survival (as assessed by blinded independent review committee) was 16·6 months (95% CI 12·6-27·2) in the ceritinib group and 8·1 months (5·8-11·1) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·55 [95% CI 0·42-0·73]; p<0·00001). The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (in 160 [85%] of 189 patients), nausea (130 [69%]), vomiting (125 [66%]), and an increase in alanine aminotransferase (114 [60%]) in the ceritinib group and nausea (in 97 [55%] of 175 patients), vomiting (63 [36%]), and anaemia (62 [35%]) in the chemotherapy group., Interpretation: First-line ceritinib showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC., Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor is deregulated in solid tumors. Cixutumumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the activity of type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor, was investigated in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin in the frontline setting., Methods: In this open-label, phase II study, patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC and a performance status of 0 to 1 were randomized (1:1) to receive 20 mg/kg cixutumumab, 500 mg/m 2 pemetrexed, and 75 mg/m 2 cisplatin (cixutumumab [n = 87]) or pemetrexed and cisplatin (control [n = 85]). Eligible patients received pemetrexed-based maintenance therapy with cixutumumab (cixutumumab arm) or without it (control arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points assessed overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model. Exploratory correlative analyses were also performed., Results: The mean age of the intent-to-treat population (n = 172) was 59 years (range 32-83). Median progression-free survival was 5.45 months with cixutumumab versus 5.22 months in the control (hazard ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.61; p = 0.44). Median overall survival was 11.33 months with cixutumumab versus 10.38 months in the control (hazard ratio = 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.36). Objective response rate did not differ between treatments (p = 0.338). Grade 3 or 4 hyperglycemia occurred at a higher rate with cixutumumab than in the control (9.4% versus 1.2%). One death possibly related to cixutumumab occurred., Conclusions: Efficacy was not improved in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC when cixutumumab was added to pemetrexed/cisplatin. Combination therapy was well tolerated and no new safety concerns were reported., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Activation of the MET proto-oncogene (MET) highly sensitive to MET inhibition has recently been described in NSCLC through two mechanisms: high-level amplification of the MNNG HOS Transforming gene (MET) (usually expressed relative to the chromosome 7 centromere [CEP7] when using fluorescence in situ hybridization) and exon 14 alterations. As partial overlap of these biomarkers occurs, whether one is purely a surrogate for the other or both can represent true oncogenic driver states continues to be explored. Cases of MET inhibitor-sensitive NSCLC harboring exon 14 alterations without coincident amplification have already been described. Here we report two cases of MET inhibitor-sensitive NSCLC harboring high-level MET amplification (MET/CEP7 ratio ≥5) without coincident exon 14 alterations, suggesting that these two methods of MET activation can produce independent MET-addicted states in NSCLC. Molecular profiling designed to capture all cases of potentially MET-addicted NSCLC should address both activation mechanisms., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report evaluates afatinib efficacy and safety in prespecified subgroups of patients aged ≥65 and <65 years., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized (2:1) to 40 mg/day oral afatinib or 40 mg/m(2)/week intravenous methotrexate. PFS was the primary end point; overall survival (OS) was the key secondary end point. Other end points included: objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, tumor shrinkage, and safety. Disease control rate (DCR) was also assessed., Results: Of 483 randomized patients, 27% (83 afatinib; 45 methotrexate) were aged ≥65 years (older) and 73% (239 afatinib; 116 methotrexate) <65 years (younger) at study entry. Similar PFS benefit with afatinib versus methotrexate was observed in older {median 2.8 versus 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-1.03], P = 0.061} and younger patients [2.6 versus 1.6 months, HR = 0.79 (0.62-1.01), P = 0.052]. In older and younger patients, the median OS with afatinib versus methotrexate was 7.3 versus 6.4 months [HR = 0.84 (0.54-1.31)] and 6.7 versus 6.2 months [HR = 0.98 (0.76-1.28)]. ORRs with afatinib versus methotrexate were 10.8% versus 6.7% and 10.0% versus 5.2%; DCRs were 53.0% versus 37.8% and 47.7% versus 38.8% in older and younger patients, respectively. In both subgroups, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were rash/acne (73%-77%) and diarrhea (70%-80%) with afatinib, and stomatitis (43%) and fatigue (31%-34%) with methotrexate. Fewer treatment-related discontinuations were observed with afatinib (each subgroup 7% versus 16%). A trend toward improved time to deterioration of global health status, pain, and swallowing with afatinib was observed in both subgroups., Conclusions: Advancing age (≥65 years) did not adversely affect clinical outcomes or safety with afatinib versus methotrexate in second-line R/M HNSCC patients., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01345682 (ClinicalTrials.gov)., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: Despite recent advances in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, there remains a need for effective treatments for progressive disease. We assessed the efficacy of pembrolizumab for patients with previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer., Methods: We did this randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 study at 202 academic medical centres in 24 countries. Patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 expression on at least 1% of tumour cells were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six per stratum with an interactive voice-response system to receive pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival both in the total population and in patients with PD-L1 expression on at least 50% of tumour cells. We used a threshold for significance of p<0.00825 (one-sided) for the analysis of overall survival and a threshold of p<0.001 for progression-free survival. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01905657., Findings: Between Aug 28, 2013, and Feb 27, 2015, we enrolled 1034 patients: 345 allocated to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 346 allocated to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 343 allocated to docetaxel. By Sept 30, 2015, 521 patients had died. In the total population, median overall survival was 10.4 months with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 12.7 months with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 8.5 months with docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer for pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg versus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.88; p=0.0008) and for pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg versus docetaxel (0.61, 0.49-0.75; p<0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 4.0 months with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 4.0 months with docetaxel, with no significant difference for pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg versus docetaxel (0.88, 0.74-1.05; p=0.07) or for pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg versus docetaxel (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.94; p=0.004). Among patients with at least 50% of tumour cells expressing PD-L1, overall survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg than with docetaxel (median 14.9 months vs 8.2 months; HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.77; p=0.0002) and with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg than with docetaxel (17.3 months vs 8.2 months; 0.50, 0.36-0.70; p<0.0001). Likewise, for this patient population, progression-free survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg than with docetaxel (median 5.0 months vs 4.1 months; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.78; p=0.0001) and with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg than with docetaxel (5.2 months vs 4.1 months; 0.59, 0.45-0.78; p<0.0001). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events were less common with pembrolizumab than with docetaxel (43 [13%] of 339 patients given 2 mg/kg, 55 [16%] of 343 given 10 mg/kg, and 109 [35%] of 309 given docetaxel)., Interpretation: Pembrolizumab prolongs overall survival and has a favourable benefit-to-risk profile in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. These data establish pembrolizumab as a new treatment option for this population and validate the use of PD-L1 selection., Funding: Merck & Co., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A number of cancer therapy agents are cleared by the kidney and may affect renal function, including cytotoxic chemotherapy agents, molecular targeted therapies, analgesics, antibiotics, radiopharmaceuticals and radiation therapy, and bone-targeted therapies. Many of these agents can be nephrotoxic, including targeted cancer therapies. The incidence, severity, and pattern of renal toxicities may vary according to the respective target of the drug. Here, we review the renal effects associated with a selection of currenty approved targeted cancer therapies, directed to vascular endothelial growth factor or VEGF receptor(s) (VEGF/VEGFR), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), human epidermal growth factor receptor2 (HER2), BRAF, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), programmed cell death protein-1 or its ligand (PD-1/PDL-1), receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL), and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). The early diagnosis and prompt treatment of these renal alterations are essential in the daily practice where molecular targeted therapies have a definitive role in the armamentarium used in many cancers., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib have been compared with chemotherapy as first-line therapies for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring epidermal growth factor receptor-activating mutations. This meta-analysis compares gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, and chemotherapy., Methods: Literature search was performed using relevant keywords. Direct and indirect meta-estimates were generated using log-linear mixed-effects models, with random effects for study. Study-to-study heterogeneity was summarized using I statistics and predictive intervals (PIs)., Results: Literature search yielded eight randomized phase 3 clinical trials comparing gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer during the last 5 years. Hazard ratio meta-estimates for progression-free survival were for gefitinib versus chemotherapy 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.63; 95% PI, 0.22-0.88), erlotinib versus chemotherapy 0.25 (95% CI, 0.15-0.42; 95% PI, 0.11-0.55), afatinib versus chemotherapy 0.44 (95% CI, 0.26-0.75; 95% PI, 0.20-0.98), erlotinib versus gefitinib 0.57 (95% CI, 0.30-1.08; 95% PI, 0.24-1.36), afatinib versus gefitinib 1.01 (95% CI, 0.53-1.92; 95% PI, 0.41-2.42), and erlotinib versus afatinib 0.56 (95% CI, 0.27-1.18; 95% PI, 0.22-1.46). Results for overall response rate and disease control rate were similar. There was no evidence that gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib improved overall survival compared with chemotherapy., Conclusion: Gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib out-performed chemotherapy in terms of progression-free survival, overall response rate, and disease control rate. Differences among gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib were not statistically significant.