Search

Background: Lung cancer remains a critical public health issue, presenting multifaceted challenges in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. This article aims to review the current landscape of lung cancer research and management, delineate the persistent challenges, and outline pragmatic solutions., Materials and Methods: Global experts from academia, regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), professional societies, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, and patient advocacy groups were gathered by the New York Lung Cancer Foundation to review the state of the art in lung cancer and to formulate calls to action., Results: Improving lung cancer management and research involves promoting tobacco cessation, identifying individuals at risk who could benefit from early detection programs, and addressing treatment-related toxicities. Efforts should focus on conducting well-designed trials to determine the optimal treatment sequence. Research into innovative biomarkers and therapies is crucial for more personalized treatment. Ensuring access to appropriate care for all patients, whether enrolled in clinical trials or not, must remain a priority., Conclusions: Lung cancer is a major health burden worldwide, and its treatment has become increasingly complex over the past two decades. Improvement in lung cancer management and research requires unified messaging and global collaboration, expanded education, and greater access to screening, biomarker testing, treatment, as well as increased representativeness, participation, and diversity in clinical trials., (Copyright © 2024 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The primary analysis (median follow-up 34.9 mo across all arms) of the phase 3 POSEIDON study revealed a statistically significant overall survival (OS) improvement with first-line tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy (T+D+CT) versus CT in patients with EGFR and ALK wild-type metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). D+CT had a trend for OS improvement versus CT that did not reach statistical significance. This article reports prespecified OS analyses after long-term follow-up (median >5 y)., Methods: A total of 1013 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to T+D+CT, D+CT, or CT, stratified by tumor cell programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression (≥50% versus <50%), disease stage (IVA versus IVB), and tumor histologic type (squamous versus nonsquamous). Serious adverse events were collected during follow-up., Results: After a median follow-up of 63.4 months across all arms, T+D+CT had sustained OS benefit versus CT (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64-0.89; 5-y OS: 15.7% versus 6.8%). OS improvement with D+CT versus CT (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-1.00; 5-y OS: 13.0%) was consistent with the primary analysis. OS benefit with T+D+CT versus CT remained more pronounced in nonsquamous (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56-0.85) versus squamous (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.65-1.10) mNSCLC. OS benefit with T+D+CT versus CT was still evident regardless of PD-L1 expression, including patients with PD-L1 tumor cell less than 1%, and remained evident in STK11-mutant (nonsquamous), KEAP1-mutant, and KRAS-mutant (nonsquamous) mNSCLC. No new safety signals were identified., Conclusions: After a median follow-up of more than 5 years, T+D+CT had durable long-term OS benefit versus CT, supporting its use as first-line treatment in mNSCLC, including in patient subgroups with harder-to-treat disease., Competing Interests: Disclosure Peters has received grants (paid to institution) from Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, iTeos, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck Serono, Mirati, PharmaMar, Promontory Therapeutics, and Seattle Genetics; has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events (paid to institution) from AiCME, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, ecancer, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech, Foundation Medicine, GlaxoSmithKline, Illumina, Imedex, Ipsen, Medscape, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati, MJH Life Sciences, Novartis, Peerview, Pfizer, RTP, and Takeda; and has participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board (payment to institution) for AbbVie, AiCME, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, BerGenBio, Biocartis, Bioinvent, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Elsevier, F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech, Fishawack, Foundation Medicine, F-Star, Genzyme, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hutchmed, Illumina, Imedex, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, iTeos, Janssen, Medscape, Medtoday, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Mirati, MJH Life Sciences, Novartis, Novocure, Nykode Therapeutics, OncologyEducation, Peerview, Pharma Mar, Pfizer, Promontory Therapeutics, Regeneron, RMEI, RTP, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. Cho reports receiving research funding from MOGAM Institute, LG Chem, Oscotec, Interpark Bio Convergence Corp., GIInnovation, GI-Cell, Abion, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Champions Oncology, CJ Bioscience, CJ Blossom Park, Cyrus, Dizal Pharma, Genexine, Janssen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Nuvalent, Oncternal, Ono, Regeneron, Dong-A ST, Bridgebio Therapeutics, Yuhan, ImmuneOncia, Illumina, Kanaph Therapeutics, Therapex, JINTSbio, Hanmi, CHA Bundang Medical Center, and Vertical Bio AG; receiving royalties from Champions Oncology, Crown Bioscience, Imagen, and PearlRiver Bio GmbH; receiving consulting fees from Abion, BeiGene, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CJ, CureLogen, Cyrus Therapeutics, Ono, Onegene Biotechnology, Yuhan, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, GI-Cell, Guardant, HK Inno-N, Imnewrun Biosciences Inc., Janssen, Takeda, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Janssen, Medpacto, Blueprint Medicines, RandBio, and Hanmi; receiving payment or honoraria for presentations from ASCO, AstraZeneca, Guardant, Roche, ESMO, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, Korean Cancer Association, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Thyroid-Head and Neck Surgery, Korean Cancer Study Group, Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, The Chinese Thoracic Oncology Society, and Pfizer; having scientific advisory board participation for Kanaph Therapeutics Inc., Bridgebio Therapeutics, Cyrus Therapeutics, Guardant Health, Oscotec Inc., J INTS Bio, Therapex Co., Ltd., Gilead, and Amgen; having membership of the board of directors for J INTS BIO; having stock ownership in TheraCanVac Inc., Gencurix Inc., Bridgebio Therapeutics, Kanaph Therapeutics Inc., Cyrus Therapeutics, Interpark Bio Convergence Corp., and J INTS BIO; having employment with Yonsei University Health System; and being a founder of DAAN Biotherapeutics. Alatorre-Alexander has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche; received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche; and participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche. Geater has received research funding (paid to institution) from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Roche; received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; and performed an advisory role for Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer. Laktionov has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events for AstraZeneca, Biocad, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche AG, and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Biocad, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, and Roche AG. Kim has received grants (paid to institution) from Yuhan and support for attending an investigator meeting from AstraZeneca. Hussein has received consulting fees from IntegraConnect, Coherus Biosciences, Athenex, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Mirati Therapeutics, Exelixis, Biopharma, Oncocyte, Aptitude Health, IntrinsiQ, GIntrinsiQ, National Community Oncology Dispensing Association, Integra PrescisionQ, AbbVie, and CTI BioPharma Corp. Araujo has received grants from Lilly, Boehringer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Merck; consulting fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Illumina, and Sanofi; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Merck, Roche, Pfizer, and Lilly; and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and AstraZeneca. Saito has received grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, and ONO Pharmaceutical, and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharmaceutical, ONO Pharmaceutical, and Pfizer. Reinmuth has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda; received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda; and participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Symphogen. Lowery, Mann, Stewart, and Jiang are employees of, and own stocks in, AstraZeneca. Garon has received grants paid to their institution from ABL-Bio, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sanko, Dynavax Technologies, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Neon, and Novartis; consulting fees paid to their institution from AbbVie, ABL-Bio, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dracen Pharmaceuticals, EMD Serono, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Natera, Novartis, Personalis, Regeneron, Sanofi, Shionogi, Xilio, and Zymeworks; and support for attending meetings and/or travel from A2 Bio and Novartis. Mok reports receiving grants paid to their institution from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, G1 Therapeutics, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ, Takeda, and Xcovery; consulting fees from AbbVie Inc., ACEA Pharma, Adagene, Alpha Biopharma Co., Ltd., Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co., AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Ltd., BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bowtie Life Insurance Company Limited, Bridge Biotherapeutics Inc., Covidien LP, C4 Therapeutics Inc., Cirina Ltd., CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Elevation Oncology, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd./Genentech, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., G1 Therapeutics Inc., geneDecode Co., Ltd., Gilead Sciences, Inc., GLG’s Healthcare, Gritstone Oncology, Inc., Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics Inc., HutchMed, Ignyta, Inc., Illumina Inc., Incyte Corporation, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech Ltd., Lilly, Lunit USA, Inc., Loxo-Oncology, Lucence Health Inc., Medscape LLC/WebMD, Medtronic, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati Therapeutics Inc., MiRXES, MoreHealth, Novartis, Novocure GmbH, Omega Therapeutics Inc., OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, PeerVoice, Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Prenetics, Puma Biotechnology Inc., Qiming Development (HK) Ltd., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Roche Pharmaceuticals/Diagnostics/Foundation One, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd., Simcere of America Inc., Synergy Research, Summit Therapeutics Sub, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd., Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical Group, XENCOR, Inc., and Yuhan Corporation; receiving payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma Co. Ltd., Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co. Ltd., AstraZeneca (before January 1, 2019), BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., InMed Medical Communications, Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Jiahui Holdings Co. Ltd., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lilly, Lucence Health Inc., MD Health Brazil, Medscape LLC, Merck Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd., Merck Sharp & Dohme, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed Co. Ltd., P. Permanyer SL, PeerVoice, Physicians’ Education Resource, Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche Pharmaceuticals/Diagnostics/Foundation One, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co. Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Takeda Oncology, and Touch Independent Medical Education Ltd.; receiving support for attending meetings and/or travel from Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme (paid to institution), Novartis, Roche (paid to self and institution), AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, MiRXES, AbbVie, Zai Lab, and Liangyihui (paid to self); having participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie Inc., ACEA Pharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bowtie Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Bristol-Myers Squibb, C4 Therapeutics Inc., Covidien LP, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Inc., Eisai, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., G1 Therapeutics Inc., Gilead Sciences Inc., Gritstone Oncology Inc., Guardant Health, geneDecode Co. Ltd. (uncompensated), Hengrui Therapeutics Inc., HutchMed, Ignyta Inc., Incyte Corporation, Imagene AI Ltd., Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Lilly, Loxo-Oncology Inc., Lunit Inc., Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati Therapeutics Inc., MiRXES Group, Novartis, OrigiMed, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology Inc., Roche/Genentech, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Sanofi-Aventis R&D, SFJ Pharmaceutical, Simcere of America Inc., Simcere Zaiming, Inc., Takeda, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical Group, XENCOR, Inc., and Yuhan Corporation; having leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee, or advocacy group, paid or unpaid, with AstraZeneca PLC, HutchMed, and Aurora; and having stock or stock options in AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology Ltd., Biolidics Ltd., HutchMed, Prenetics, D3 Bio, Lunit, Bowtie Life Insurance, Lakeshore Biotech Ltd., Loxo-oncology, Virtus Medical Group, and Phanes Therapeutics, Inc. Johnson has received research funding paid to their institution from AbbVie, Acerta, Adaptimmune, Amgen, Apexigen, Arcus Biosciences, Array BioPharma, Artios Pharma, AstraZeneca, Atreca, BeiGene, BerGenBio, BioAtla, Black Diamond, Boehringer Ingelheim, Calithera Biosciences, Carisma Therapeutics, Corvus Pharmaceutical, Curis, CytomX, Daiichi Sankyo, Dracen Pharmaceuticals, Dynavax, Lilly, Elicio Therapeutics, EMD Serono, EQRx, Erasca, Exelixis, Fate Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Genmab, Genocea Biosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Harpoon, Helsinn Healthcare SA, Hengrui Therapeutics, Hutchison MediPharma, IDEAYA Biosciences, IGM Biosciences, Immunitas Therapeutics, Immunocore, Incyte, Janssen, Kadmon Pharmaceuticals, Kartos Therapeutics, Loxo-Oncology, Lycera, Memorial Sloan-Kettering, Merck, Merus, Mirati Therapeutics, NeoImmune Tech, Neovia Oncology, Novartis, Numab Therapeutics, Nuvalent, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, Palleon Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, PMV Pharmaceuticals, Rain Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Relay Therapeutics, Revolution Medicines, Ribon Therapeutics, Rubius Therapeutics, Sanofi, Seven and Eight Biopharmaceuticals/Birdie Biopharmaceuticals, Shattuck Labs, Silicon Therapeutics, Stem CentRx, Syndax Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Tarveda, TCR2 Therapeutics, Tempest Therapeutics, Tizona Therapeutics, TMUNITY Therapeutics, Turning Point Therapeutics, University of Michigan, Vyriad, Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Checkpoint Therapeutics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Jounce Therapeutics, Mythic Therapeutics, RasCal Therapeutics, WindMIL Therapeutics, ArriVent BioPharma, Bayer, LockBody Therapeutics, and Taiho Oncology; and receiving consulting fees paid to their institution from AbbVie, Amgen, Arrivent, Alentis Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, D3 Bio Limited, Daiichi Sankyo, Fate Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Genmab, Genocea Biosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gritstone Oncology, Hookipa Biotech, Janssen, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Molecular Axiom, Novartis, Pyramid Biosciences, Revolution Medicines, Sanofi-Aventis, SeaGen, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, VBL Therapeutics, Arcus Biosciences, Immunocore, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Synthekine, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences, Normunity, Lilly, Novocure, and Pfizer. The remaining authors delcare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions are recurrent oncogenic drivers found in a variety of solid tumours, including lung cancer. Several tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors have been developed to treat tumours with NTRK gene fusions. Larotrectinib and entrectinib are first-generation TRK inhibitors that have demonstrated efficacy in patients with TRK fusion lung cancers. Genomic testing is recommended for all patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer for optimal drug therapy selection. Multiple testing methods can be employed to identify NTRK gene fusions in the clinic and each has its own advantages and limitations. Among these assays, RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) can be considered a gold standard for detecting NTRK gene fusions; however, several alternatives with minimally acceptable sensitivity and specificity are also available in areas where widespread access to NGS is unfeasible. This review highlights the importance of testing for NTRK gene fusions in lung cancer, ideally using the gold-standard method of RNA-based NGS, the various assays that are available, and treatment algorithms for patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Sanofi. Marina Chiara Garassino: Personal financial interests: AstraZeneca, Abion, MSD International GmbH, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Italia S.p.A, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Seattle Genetics, Mirati, Daiichi Sankyo, Regeneron, Merck, Blueprint, Jansenn, Sanofi, AbbVie, BeiGenius, Oncohost, Medscape, Gilead, Io Biotech; Institutional financial interests: Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer (MISP); AstraZeneca, MSD International GmbH, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Italia S.p.A, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Ignyta, Incyte, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Tiziana, Foundation Medicine, GSK, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals; Others: AIRC, AIFA, Italian Moh, TRANSCAN; Research funding, Horizon 2020. Herbert H. Loong: Advisory: Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Illumina, Novartis, Merck Sereno, Takeda, George Clinical; Speakers’ bureau: AbbVie, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Guardant Health, Novartis; Travel support: Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer; Research funding: MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis; Others: Member of Pharmacy and Poisons (Registration of Pharmaceutical Products and Substances: Certification of Clinical Trial/Medicinal Test) Committee, Pharmacy & Poisons Board of Hong Kong. Fernando Lopez-Rios: Honoraria/advisory boards: Abbvie, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, Thermo Fisher Scientific; Associated research paid to institution: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Thermo Fisher Scientific. Tony Mok: Grant/research support from (paid to institution): AstraZeneca, BMS, G1 Therapeutics, MSD, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ, Takeda, XCovery; Speaker’s fees received from: ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma Co., Ltd., Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co., Ltd., AstraZeneca (before 1/1/19), BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., InMed Medical Communication, Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Jiahui Holdings Co. Limited, LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lilly, Lucence Health Inc., MD Health Brazil, Medscape LLC, Merck Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd., Merck Sharp & Dohme, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed Co. Ltd., P. Permanyer SL, PeerVoice, Physicians’ Education Resource (PER), Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche Pharmaceuticals/Diagnostics/Foundation One, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Ltd., Shanghai Promedican Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd, Takeda Oncology, Touch Independent Medical Education Ltd; Honoraria/honorarium received (for consultation services/as independent consultant) from: Abbvie Inc., ACEA Pharma, Adagene, Alpha Biopharma Co., Ltd., Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co., Ltd., AnHeart Therapeutics, AstraZeneca (before 1/1/19), AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Ltd., BeiGene, BerGenBio ASA, Berry Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, BMS, Bowtie Life Insurance Company Limited, Bridge Biotherapeutics Inc., Covidien LP, C4 Therapeutics Inc., Cirina Ltd., CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Elevation Oncology, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Genentech, GLG’s Healthcare, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., G1 Therapeutics Inc., geneDecode Co., Ltd, Gilead Sciences, Inc. Gritstone Oncology, Inc., Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics Inc., HutchMed, Ignyta, Inc., Illumina, Inc., Incyte Corporation, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech Ltd, Lilly, Lunit USA, Inc., Loxo Oncology, Lucence Health Inc., Medscape LLC/ WebMD, Medtronic, Merck Serono, MSD, Mirati Therapeutics Inc., MiRXES, MoreHealth, Novartis, Novocure GmbH, Omega Therapeutics Inc., OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, PeerVoice, Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Prenetics, Puma Biotechnology Inc., Qiming Development (HK) Ltd., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Roche Pharmaceuticals/Diagnostics/Foundation One, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd., Simcere of America Inc., Summit Therapeutics Sub, Inc., Synergy Research, Takeda Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd., Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical Group, XENCOR, Inc., Yuhan Corporation; Stock shareholder in: Alentis Therapeutics AG, AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology Ltd., Biolidics Ltd., HutchMed, Prenetics, D3 Bio, Lunit Inc.; Stock options: Bowtie Life Insurance Co. Ltd., D3 Bio, Lakeshore Biotech Ltd, Loxo Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc., Virtus Medical Group, Phanes Therapeutics, Inc., Insighta; Advisory board for: AbbVie Inc., ACEA Pharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BerGenBio ASA, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bowtie Life Insurance Co Ltd, BMS, C4 Therapeutics Inc, Covidien LP, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Inc., Eisai, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., G1 Therapeutics Inc., Gilead Sciences Inc., Gritstone Oncology, Inc., Guardant Health, geneDecode Co. Ltd. (uncompensated), Hengrui Therapeutics Inc., HutchMed, Ignyta Inc., Incyte Corporation, Imagene AI Ltd., Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Lily, Loxo Oncology Inc., Lunit, Inc., Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati Therapeutics Inc., MiRXES Group, Novartis, OrigiMed, Pfizer, Prenetics, Puma Biotechnology Inc., Roche/Genentech, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Sanofi-Aventis R&D, SFJ Pharmaceutical, Simcere of America Inc., Simcere Zaiming, Inc., Takeda, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical Group, Yuhan Corporation; Board of directors/leadership roles (remunerated): AstraZeneca PLC (from January 2019–Present), HutchMed, Aurora, Insighta (from July 2023–Present); Board of directors/leadership roles (non-remunerated): American Society of Clinical Oncology (2018–2022), Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group (2016–Present), Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited (2005–2012), Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (2009–2020), Hong Kong Cancer Fund (2011–Present), Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society (2004–Present), International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (2007–2019), St. Stephen’s College & Prep. School (2017–Present), Hong Kong Academy of Sciences (2022–Present). Solange Peters: I have Received education grants, provided consultation, attended advisory boards and/or provided lectures for the following organizations, from whom honoraria received (all fees to institution): Consultation/Advisory role: AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, BerGenBio, Biocartis, BioInvent, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Fishawack, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Hutchmed, Illumina, Incyte, Ipsen, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Mirati, Nykode Therapeutics, Novartis, Novocure, Pharma Mar, Promontory Therapeutics, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda; Board of director position: Galenica; Talk in a company’s organized public event: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Foundation Medicine, GSK, Illumina, Ipsen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Mirati, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Takeda; Receipt of grants/research supports: Principal investigator in trials (institutional financial support for clinical trials) sponsored by: Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Beigene, BMS, GSK, iTeos, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Mirati, Pharma Mar, Promontory Therapeutics, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics. David Planchard: Consulting, advisory role or lectures: AstraZeneca, Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Pierre-fabre, Takeda, ArriVent, Mirati, Seagen; Clinical trials research as principal or co-investigator (institutional financial interests): AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Medimmune, Sanofi-Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure, Daiichi Sankyo, Abbvie, Janssen, Pierre-Fabre, Takeda, ArriVent, Mirati, Seagen; Travel, accommodations and/or expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer. Sanjay Popat: Consulting fees (personal fees): Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, GSK, Guardant Health, Incyte, Janssen, Lilly, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Turning Point Therapeutics, EQRx; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events (personal fees): AstraZeneca, Bayer, Guardant Health, Janssen, Merck Serono, Roche, Takeda; Payment for expert testimony (personal fees): Roche, Merck Serono; Support for attending meetings and/or travel (travel expenses reimbursement): Janssen, Roche; Leadership in fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group (unpaid): British Thoracic Oncology Group, ALK Positive UK, Lung Cancer Europe, Ruth Strauss Foundation, Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation; ETOP-IBCSG Partners Foundation Board. Erin R. Rudzinski: Clinical trials research: ON-TRK study (Bayer). Alexander Drilon: Honoraria/advisory boards: 14ner/Elevation Oncology, Amgen, Abbvie, ArcherDX, AstraZeneca, Beigene, BergenBio, Blueprint Medicines, Chugai Pharmaceutical, EcoR1, EMD Serono, Entos, Exelixis, Helsinn, Hengrui Therapeutics, Ignyta/Genentech/Roche, Janssen, Loxo/Bayer/Lilly, Merus, Monopteros, MonteRosa, Novartis, Nuvalent, Pfizer, Prelude, Repare RX, Takeda/Ariad/Millenium, Treeline Bio, TP Therapeutics, Tyra Biosciences, Verastem; Associated research paid to institution: Pfizer, Exelixis, GSK, Teva, Taiho, PharmaMar; Royalties: Wolters Kluwer; Other (food/beverage): Merck, Puma, Merus, Boehringer Ingelheim; CME honoraria: Answers in CME, Applied Pharmaceutical Science, Inc., AXIS, Clinical Care Options, EPG Health, Harborside Nexus, I3 Health, Imedex, Liberum, Medendi, Medscape, Med Learning, MJH Life Sciences, MORE Health, Ology, OncLive, Paradigm, Peerview Institute, PeerVoice, Physicians Education Resources, Remedica Ltd., Research to Practice, RV More, Targeted Oncology, TouchIME, WebMD. Caicun Zhou: Consulting fees: Innovent Biologics, Hengrui, Qilu, TopAlliance Biosciences; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Lily China, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Qilu, Hengrui, Innovent Biologics, Alice, C-Stone, LUYE Pharma, TopAlliance Biosciences, Amoy Diagnostics, AnHeart., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Biomarker tests in lung cancer have been traditionally ordered by the treating oncologist upon confirmation of an appropriate pathological diagnosis. The delay this introduces prolongs yet further what is already a complex, multi-stage, pre-treatment pathway and delays the start of first-line systemic treatment, which is crucially informed by the results of such analysis. Reflex testing, in which the responsibility for testing for an agreed range of biomarkers lies with the pathologist, has been shown to standardise and expedite the process. Twelve experts discussed the rationale and considerations for implementing reflex testing as standard clinical practice., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure LEH reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Benecke, Medtalks and VJOncology; personal fees for participation in mentorship programme funded by AstraZeneca; personal fees for travel support from Roche; personal fees as member of the committee that revised the Dutch guidelines on NSCLC, brain metastases and leptomeningeal metastases; fees paid to her institution for an educational webinar from Janssen; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bayer, high5oncology, Lilly and MSD; fees paid to her institution for interview sessions from Roche; fees paid to her institution for podcast appearance from Takeda; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer and Merck; institutional funding as a local principal investigator (PI) from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; non-remunerated roles as chair for metastatic NSCLC of the lung cancer group for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and as the secretary of the studies foundation for NVALT (Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose). KMK reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Medscape, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; personal fees for consultancy and advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Debiopharm, Diaceutics, Janssen, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; non-remunerated roles as the past Pathology Committee Chair for IASLC (International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer) and member of the UK Lung Cancer Consortium. JM reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD and Roche; fees paid to her institution for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and MSD; fees paid to her institution for travel expenses from Ipsen. TSM reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed Medical Communication, Janssen, Jiahui Holdings Co., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, MSD, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, PER, Permanyer SL, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Takeda and Touch Medical Media; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina Ltd., Covidien LP, CStone Pharma, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd., Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Loxo Oncology, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, Mirati Therapeutics, MiRXES, MoreHealth, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Puma Tech, Qiming Development, Roche, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd., Synergy Research, Takeda, Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical and Yuhan; personal fees as the Chairman for ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from AstraZeneca and HutchMed; holds stocks/shares from AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Biolidics Ltd., HutchMed and Sanomics Ltd.; institutional funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis Oncology, G1 Therapeutics, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Takeda and XCovery; non-remunerated roles as an invited speaker with AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc. and Sanomics Ltd. and for an advisory role with geneDecode; non-remunerated leadership roles with ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology), ATORG (Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group), CLCRF (Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited), CSCO (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), HKCF (Hong Kong Cancer Fund), HKCTS (Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society), IASLC and St. Stephen’s College & Prep School (Hong Kong). UN reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from MSD; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership and a writing engagement from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a coordinating PI for Bayer; non-remunerated roles as a PI for clinical trials funded by Deutsche Krebshilfe and as a member of the board of directors and vice-chair of ‘Strahlenschutzkommission’ from the German Commission on Radiological Protection. AP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Mundipharma and Takeda; personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Roche; non-remunerated activities with AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) as member of the Scientific Committee for lung cancer guidelines. SP reports personal fees for an editorial role as an Associate Editor for Annals of Oncology; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, e-cancer, Eli Lilly, Fishawack, Illumina, Imedex, Medscape, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, OncologyEducation, PER, Pfizer, PRIME, RMEI, Roche/Genentech, RTP, Sanofi and Takeda; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bio Invent, Biocartis, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Illumina, Incyte, IQVIA, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody; institutional funding as a steering committee member from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BMS, iTeos, Mirati, MSD, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics and Roche/Genentech; institutional funding as a coordinating PI from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a trial chair from GSK and Roche/Genentech; non-remunerated role as President and Council Member for the Ballet Béjart Lausanne Foundation; non-remunerated leadership roles as President of ESMO (2020-2022), Vice-President of SAMO (Swiss Academy of Multidisciplinary Oncology), Vice-President of Lung Group for SAKK (Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research); non-remunerated role as PI involved in academic trials for ETOP (European Thoracic Oncology Platform)/EORTC/SAKK; non-remunerated role as Council Member and Scientific Committee Chair for ETOP/IBCSG Partners (International Breast Cancer Study Group); member of AACR (American Association for Cancer Research), ASCO, ASMAC/VSAO (Association of Swiss Interns and Residents), FMH (Association of Swiss Physicians) and IASLC. DP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis, Peer CME, Pfizer, priME Oncology and Samsung; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Samsung; institutional funding as a PI from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Sanofi-Aventis. EFS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi Sankyo; personal fees for advisory board membership from Merck Serono; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda; institutional funding as a local PI from AstraZeneca, Genmab, Gilead and Pfizer. BJS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen and Roche/Genentech; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck and Novartis; fees paid to his institution for steering committee membership from Novartis, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from Cancer Council Victoria and Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia; personal fees as a consultant from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre; royalties from UpToDate. GV reports personal fees as an invited speaker and for advisory board membership from Roche; personal fees as a consultant from Ab Medica; institutional funding as a PI from AIRC (Fondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS) and the Italian Ministry of Health. MR reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mirati, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi.

Introduction: Most published guidelines for genomic biomarker testing in NSCLC reflect the disease epidemiology and treatments readily available in Europe and North America. Nevertheless, 60% of annual global NSCLC cases occur in Asia, where patient characteristics, tumor molecular profiles, and treatments vary greatly from the Western world. For example, mutations in the EGFR occur at a higher prevalence in Asia than in other world regions. Although medical associations such as the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, European Society for Medical Oncology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology have described principles for tumor genomic biomarker testing in NSCLC, there is a need for recommendations specific for Asia., Methods: This report provides consensus recommendations for NSCLC biomarker testing from Asian lung cancer experts for clinicians working in Asia to improve patient care. Biomarker testing approaches for actionable genetic alterations in EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and others are discussed., Results: These recommendations are divided into nonmetastatic and metastatic forms of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. Owing to the higher prevalence of EGFR mutations in Asia, the experts emphasized the need for EGFR testing to include not just common mutations (exon 19 deletions and L858R substitutions) but also other uncommon EGFR mutations. In addition to the assessment of biomarkers in the tumor tissue, the role of assessing tumor biomarkers by liquid biopsy is discussed., Conclusion: This consensus provides practical recommendations for biomarker testing in nonmetastatic and metastatic Asian NSCLC patients., (Copyright © 2022 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure LEH reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Benecke, Medtalks and VJOncology; personal fees for participation in mentorship programme funded by AstraZeneca; personal fees for travel support from Roche; personal fees as member of the committee that revised the Dutch guidelines on NSCLC, brain metastases and leptomeningeal metastases; fees paid to her institution for an educational webinar from Janssen; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Bayer, high5oncology, Lilly and MSD; fees paid to her institution for interview sessions from Roche; fees paid to her institution for podcast appearance from Takeda; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer and Merck; institutional funding as a local principal investigator (PI) from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Takeda; non-remunerated roles as chair for metastatic NSCLC of the lung cancer group for European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and as the secretary of the studies foundation for Nederlandse Vereniging van Artsen voor Longziekten en Tuberculose (NVALT). KK reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Medscape, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; personal fees for consultancy and advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Debiopharm, Diaceutics, Janssen, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche and Roche Diagnostics/Ventana; non-remunerated roles as the past Pathology Committee Chair for International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and member of the UK Lung Cancer Consortium. JM reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, MSD and Roche; fees paid to her institution for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and MSD; fees paid to her institution for travel expenses from Ipsen. TSM reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Daz Group, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed Medical Communication, Janssen, Jiahui Holdings Co., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, MIRXES, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, PER, Permanyer SL, Pfizer, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Takeda and Touch Medical Media; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Berry Oncology, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina Ltd, Covidien LP, CStone Pharma, Curio Science, D3 Bio Ltd, Da Volterra, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, Hengrui, Ignyta, Incyte, Inivata, IQVIA, Janssen, Lakeshore Biotech, Loxo Oncology, Lucene Health Inc., Lunit USA, Inc., Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, Mirati Therapeutics, MiRXES, MoreHealth, MSD, Novartis, OrigiMed, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Puma Tech, Qiming Development, Roche, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd, Synergy Research, Takeda, Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Virtus Medical and Yuhan; personal fees as the Chairman for ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from AstraZeneca and HutchMed; holds stocks/shares from AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Biolidics Ltd, HutchMed and Sanomics Ltd.; institutional funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis Oncology, G1 Therapeutics, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Takeda and XCovery; non-remunerated roles as an invited speaker with AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc. and Sanomics Ltd and for an advisory role with geneDecode; non-remunerated leadership roles with American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group (ATORG), Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited (CLCRF), Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO), Hong Kong Cancer Fund (HKCF), Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society (HKCTS), IASLC and St. Stephen’s College & Prep School (Hong Kong). UN reports fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from MSD; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership and a writing engagement from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a coordinating PI for Bayer; non-remunerated roles as a PI for clinical trials funded by Deutsche Krebshilfe and as a member of the board of directors and vice-chair of ‘Strahlenschutzkommission’ from the German Commission on Radiological Protection. AP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Mundipharma and Takeda; personal fees for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Roche; non-remunerated activities with Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) as member of the Scientific Committee for lung cancer guidelines. SP reports personal fees for an editorial role as an Associate Editor for Annals of Oncology; fees paid to her institution as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Fishawack, Illumina, Imedex, Medscape, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, OncologyEducation, Physician’s Education Resource (PER), Pfizer, Partnerships in International Medical Education (PRIME), RMEI Medical Education, LLC (RMEI), Roche/Genentech, Research To Practice (RTP), Sanofi and Takeda; fees paid to her institution for advisory board membership from AbbVie, Amgen, Arcus, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bio Invent, Biocartis, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F-Star, Foundation Medicine, Genzyme, Gilead, GSK, Illumina, Incyte, IQVIA, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Novocure, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody; institutional funding as a steering committee member from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BMS, iTeos, Mirati, MSD, PharmaMar, Phosplatin Therapeutics and Roche/Genentech; institutional funding as a coordinating PI from AstraZeneca; institutional funding as a trial chair from GSK and Roche/Genentech; non-remunerated role as President and Council Member for the Ballet Béjart Lausanne Foundation; non-remunerated leadership roles as President of ESMO (2020-2022), Vice- President of Swiss Academy of Multidisciplinary Oncology (SAMO), Vice-President of Lung Group for Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK); non-remunerated role as PI involved in academic trials for European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP)/EORTC/SAKK; non-remunerated role as Council Member and Scientific Committee Chair for ETOP/International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) Partners member of American Association of Cancer Research (AACR), ASCO, Association Suisse des médecines-assistant(e)s et chef(fe)s de Clinique (ASMAC)/Verband Schweizerischer Assistenz- und Oberärztinnen und- ärzte (VSAO), Fédération des médecins suisses (FMH) and IASLC. DP reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis, Peer CME, Pfizer, priME Oncology and Samsung; personal fees for advisory board membership from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Samsung; institutional funding as a PI from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Sanofi-Aventis. ES reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi Sankyo; personal fees for advisory board membership from Merck Serono; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda; institutional funding as a local PI from AstraZeneca, Genmab, Gilead and Pfizer. BJS reports personal fees as an invited speaker from AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen and Roche/Genentech; fees paid to his institution for advisory board membership from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck and Novartis; fees paid to his institution for steering committee membership from Novartis, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; personal fees as a member of the board of directors from Cancer Council Victoria and Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia; personal fees as a consultant from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre; royalties from UpToDate. GV reports personal fees as an invited speaker and for advisory board membership from Roche; personal fees as a consultant from Ab Medica; institutional funding as a PI from Fondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS (AIRC) and the Italian Ministry of Health. MR reports personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi; personal fees for advisory board membership from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mirati, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi.

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.)

Introduction: Brigatinib is a potent next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treatment-naive and crizotinib-refractory advanced ALK-positive (ALK+) NSCLC. We evaluated brigatinib after other next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Methods: In this single-arm, phase 2, ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2 (NCT03535740), patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC whose disease progressed on alectinib or ceritinib received brigatinib 180 mg once daily (after 7-d 90-mg lead-in). Primary end point was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was analyzed., Results: Among 103 patients (data cutoff: September 30, 2020; median follow-up [range]: 10.8 [0.5-17.7] mo), confirmed IRC-ORR was 26.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.0-35.8), median duration of response, 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.6-not reached), and median progression-free survival (mPFS), 3.8 months (95% CI: 3.5-5.8). mPFS was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8-3.7) in patients with ctDNA-detectable baseline ALK fusion (n = 64). Among 86 patients who progressed on alectinib, IRC-ORR was 29.1% (95% CI: 19.8-39.9); mPFS was 3.8 months (95% CI: 1.9-5.4). Resistance mutations were present in 33.3% (26 of 78) of baseline ctDNA; 54% (14 of 26) of mutations were G1202R; 52% (33 of 64) of patients with detectable ALK fusion had EML4-ALK variant 3. Most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events were increased creatine phosphokinase (32%) and diarrhea (27%). The mean dose intensity of brigatinib (180 mg once daily) was 85.9%., Conclusions: In ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of brigAtinib-2, brigatinib was found to have a limited activity in patients with ALK+ NSCLC post-ceritinib or post-alectinib therapy. mPFS was longer with brigatinib in patients without baseline detectable plasma ALK fusion., (Copyright © 2022 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer in 2021. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 34 leading experts in the management of lung cancer. The aim of the consensus was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where the available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were: (i) tissue and biomarkers analyses; (ii) early and locally advanced disease; (iii) metastatic disease and (iv) clinical trial design, patient's perspective and miscellaneous. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the recommendations developed, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation., Competing Interests: Disclosure AP received education grants, provided consultation, attended advisory board meetings and/or provided lectures for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Daiichi Sankyo, eCancer, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medscape, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Merck KGaA, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, outside the submitted work. NL reports unrelated institutional research funding received from Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Lilly, EMD Serono, Guardant Health, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda and unrelated personal fees (CME lectures, consulting) received from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, EMD Serono, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme. SPo reports personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Guardant Health, Janssen, Lilly, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Seattle Genetics, Turning Point Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. KK reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Roche, during the conduct of the study. MJA reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, Alpha Pharmaceutical, Amgen, Lilly, ONO, MSD, Merck, outside the submitted work. MEA reports personal fees from Biocartis, Invivoscribe, Janssen Global Services, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck, RMEI Medical Education, Clinical Care Options, PeerView Institute for medical education, outside the submitted work. OA reports personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Lilly, Merck, BMS, grants and personal fees from Roche, outside the submitted work. DP reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche, Samsung, AbbVie, Janssen, outside the submitted work; and clinical trials research (as principal investigator or co-investigator): AstraZeneca, AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, MedImmune, Sanofi-Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen. FdM reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from Boehringer, personal fees from Roche, BMS, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, outside the submitted work. AMD reports personal fees from Roche, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Jansen, Chiesi, grants and personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Bayer, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. RD reports personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Foundation Medicine, Karyopharm, outside the submitted work. CFF reports grants and other from AstraZeneca, other from MSD, grants and other from Elekta, during the conduct of the study. JF reports personal fees from Blueprint Medicines, Novartis, Janssen, AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. EF reports personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Medscape, Merck KGaA, MSD, Novartis, PeerVoice, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Puma Biotechnology, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Springer, Takeda, Touch Medical, grants from Grant for Oncology Innovation (GOI), grants from Fundación Merck Salud, personal fees from CME Outfitters, BeiGene, Medical Trends, Peptomyc, Regeneron, from Syneos Health, outside the submitted work; and Grifols: independent member of the board. GC reports consultation fees from Pfizer, Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daichii Sankyo, Seagen, Gilead, Novartis, Lilly, Ellipsis, Merck. RH reports consultation fees from AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, ARMO Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Bolt Biotherapeutics, BMS, Candel Therapeutics, Inc., Checkpoint Therapeutics, Cybrexa Therapeutics, DynamiCure Biotechnology, LLC, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Serono, Foundation Medicine, Inc., Genentech/Roche, Genmab, Gilead, Halozyme Therapeutics, Heat Biologics, HiberCell, Inc., I-Mab Biopharma, Immune-Onc Therapeutics, Immunocore, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Loxo Oncology, Merck and Company, Mirati Therapeutics, Nektar, Neon Therapeutics, NextCure, Novartis, Ocean Biomedical, Inc., Oncocyte Corp., Oncternal Therapeutics, Pfizer, Refactor Health, Inc., Ribbon Therapeutics, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Shire PLC, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, STCube Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Symphogen, Takeda, Tesaro, Tocagen, Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., WindMIL Therapeutics, Xencor, Inc., research support from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech/Roche, Merck and Company, and participation on board of Immunocore Holdings Limited, Junshi Pharmaceuticals. PAJ reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Loxo Oncology, grants and personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Voronoi, grants and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Biocartis, Novartis, Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Takeda Oncology, personal fees from Mirati Therapeutics, Transcenta, Silicon Therapeutics, Syndax, Nuvalent, Bayer, Eisai, Allorion Therapeutics, Accutar Biotech, AbbVie, grants from Revolution Medicines, grants from PUMA, grants from Astellas, outside the submitted work. In addition, PAJ is a co-inventor on a DFCI patent on EGFR mutations and receives postmarketing royalties from Lab Corp. TJ reports personal fees from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, MSD, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Ignyta, Novartis, Bayer, Amgen, Gilead, Puma Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. TM reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, personal fees from Pfizer, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from BMS, grants and personal fees from Ono, MSD, personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Taiho, personal fees from Takeda, Amgen, Invitae, Merck Biopharma, Thermo Fisher, grants from Bridge Biotherapeutics, grants and personal fees from Ethicon, outside the submitted work. TM reports personal fees and other from AbbVie, Inc., ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma Co. Ltd, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co. Ltd, grants, personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, personal fees and other from BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, grants, personal fees and other from BMS, personal fees and other from Blueprint Medicines Corporation, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd, other from geneDecode, personal fees and other from Gritstone Oncology Inc., Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics, Ignyta Inc., Incyte Corporation, personal fees from InMed Medical Communication, personal fees and other from Janssen, Lilly, Loxo Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc., personal fees from MD Health (Brazil), Medscape/WebMD, grants, personal fees and other from Merck Serono, MSD, personal fees and other from Mirati Therapeutics Inc., personal fees from MoreHealth, grants, personal fees and other from Novartis, personal fees and other from OrigiMed, personal fees from PeerVoice, Physicians' Education Resource, P. Permanyer SL, grants, personal fees and other from Pfizer, Inc., personal fees from PrIME Oncology, personal fees and other from Puma Biotechnology Inc., personal fees from Research to Practice, grants, personal fees and other from Roche, personal fees and other from Sanofi-Aventis R&D, grants, personal fees and other from Takeda, personal fees from Touch Medical Media, other from Virtus Medical Group, personal fees and other from Yuhan Corporation, other from AstraZeneca PLC, Hutchison Chi-Med, Sanomics Ltd, grants from Clovis Oncology, grants, personal fees and other from SFJ Pharmaceuticals, grants from Xcovery, personal fees and other from Curio Science, personal fees from Inivata, Berry Oncology, grants and personal fees from G1 Therapeutics Inc., other from Aurora, personal fees from Qiming Development (HK) Ltd, Daz Group, Lucence Health Inc., Merck Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Ltd, Liangyihui Network Technology Co., Ltd, Taiho, personal fees and other from Gilead Sciences, Inc, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Covidien LP, outside the submitted work. NN reports personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Qiagen, Biocartis, Incyte, Roche, BMS, Merck, Thermo Fisher, AstraZeneca, personal fees from Sanofi, Eli Lilly, Bayer, ArcherDx, grants and personal fees from Illumina, personal fees from Amgen, outside the submitted work. LPA reports grants from MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, BMS, personal fees from Lilly, MSD, Roche, Pharmamar, Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Servier, Amgen, Pfizer, Ipsen, Sanofi, Bayer, Blueprint, BMS, Mirati, Janssen, other from Genomica, Altum sequencing, outside the submitted work. SR reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Takeda, Eisai, Lilly, outside the submitted work. LS reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from Novartis, personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Genentech, personal fees from Takeda, Pfizer, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. JV reports honoraria for invited speaker from AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, and Novartis; participation on advisory board of AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daichi Sankyo, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche; grant from MSD. IIW reports grants and personal fees from Genentech/Roche, Bayer, BMS, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, HTG Molecular, personal fees from Asuragen, grants and personal fees from Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Guardant Health, personal fees from Flame, grants and personal fees from Novartis, Sanofi, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, grants and personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Oncocyte, MSD, Platform Health, grants from Adaptive, Adaptimmune, EMD Serono, Takeda, Karus, Johnson & Johnson, 4D, Iovance, Akoya, outside the submitted work. JW reports personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, grants and personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Ignyta, grants and personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Lilly, Loxo, MSD, grants and personal fees from Novartis, Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, outside the submitted work. YLW reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Novartis, Takeda; grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Hengrui and Roche, outside the submitted work. JCHY reports personal fees and other from Amgen, grants, personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, personal fees and other from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, other from Eli Lilly, personal fees and other from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, MSD, Novartis, personal fees from Ono Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, personal fees and other from Roche/Genentech, Takeda Oncology, Yuhan Pharmaceuticals, other from Johnson & Johnson, Glaxo, Puma Technology, outside the submitted work. YY reports and contracted studies with ArcherDx, Chugai Pharma and Thermo Fisher Science; honoraria for lectures from MSD, Chugai Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche/Ventana, Agilent/Dako, Thermo Fisher Science, ArcherDx, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Amgen and Sysmex; participation on advisory board of MSD, Chugai Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda and Daiichi-Sankyo. GP reports grants from Amgen, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck, grants and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Roche, BMS, grants from Lilly, grants and personal fees from MSD, Novartis, outside the submitted work. SPe received education grants, provided consultation, attended advisory board meetings and/or provided lectures for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biocartis, BioInvent, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Foundation Medicine, Illumina, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Novartis, PharmaMar, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaccibody, from whom she received honoraria (all fees to institution). All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic promises to have lasting impacts on cancer clinical trials that could lead to faster patient access to new treatments. In this article, an international panel of oncology experts discusses the lasting impacts of the pandemic on oncology clinical trials and proposes solutions for clinical trial stakeholders, with the support of recent data on worldwide clinical trials collected by IQVIA. These lasting impacts and proposed solutions encompass three topic areas. Firstly, acceleration and implementation of new operational approaches to oncology trials with patient-centric, fully decentralized virtual approaches that include remote assessments via telemedicine and remote devices. Geographical differences in the uptake of remote technology, including telemedicine, are discussed in the article, focusing on the impact of the local adoption of new operational approaches. Secondly, innovative clinical trials. The pandemic has highlighted the need for new trial designs that accelerate research and limit risks and burden for patients while driving optimization of clinical trial objectives and endpoints, while testing is being minimized. Areas of considerations for clinical trial stakeholders are discussed in detail. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the underrepresentation of minority groups in clinical trials; the approach for oncology clinical trials to improve generalizability of efficacy and outcomes data is discussed. Thirdly, a new problem-focused collaborative framework between oncology trial stakeholders, including decision makers, to leverage and further accelerate the innovative approaches in clinical research developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This could shorten timelines for patient access to new treatments by addressing the cultural and technological barriers to adopting new operational approaches and innovative clinical trials. The role of the different stakeholders is described, with the aim of making COVID-19 a catalyst for positive change in oncology clinical research and eventually in cancer care., Competing Interests: Disclosure BR: Consultancy: Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Clinigen, IQVIA, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche (personal fees). FC: Consultancy role for: Amgen, Astellas/Medivation, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GE Oncology, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Macrogenics, Medscape, Merck-Sharp, Merus BV, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, prIME Oncology, Roche, Sanofi, Samsung Bioepis, Seagen and Teva. Local PI, institutional, financial interest: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi, Eisai, Fresenius GmbH, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Ipsen, Macrogenics, Medigene, MedImmune, Merck, Millenium, Nektar Therapeutics, Nerviano, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Sonus, Taiho Oncology, Tesaro, Tigris, Wilex and Wyeth. JC: Research support to institution: Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Sun Pharma, Kartos, Jazz Pharma, Actuate, Abbvie and Biopath Holdings. Consulting from Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Sun Pharma, Jazz Pharma, Abbvie and Biopath Holdings. JT: Scientific consultancy role for Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Avvinity, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech Inc, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Ikena Oncology, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, MSD, Mirati, Neophore, Novartis, Orion Biotechnology, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Taiho, Tessa Therapeutics and TheraMyc. Educational collaboration with Imedex, Medscape Education, MJH Life Sciences, PeerView Institute for Medical Education and Physicians Education Resource (PER). Clinical trials or contracted research for Amgen Inc, Array Biopharma Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Debiopharm International SA, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech Inc, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Janssen-Cilag SA, MedImmune, Menarini, Merck Health KGAA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus NV, Mirati, Novartis Farmacéutica SA, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Sanofi Aventis Recherche & Développement, Servier, Taiho Pharma USA Inc, Spanish Association Against Cancer Scientific Foundation and Cancer Research UK (fees to institution). MT: Data Safety Monitoring Committee: Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc. Grant support: Celgene and Halozyme. Advisory board: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Biotech Research, Boehriner Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corcept Therapeutics, Geistlich Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, Merck & Co., Inc., Seagen, Inc. and Swedish Orphan Biovitrum. Consultant: ISPEN, Inc., Incyte, Karyopharm Therapeutics and Novartis Pharmaceuticals. OO: Research funding: Incyte, Amgen and Celgene. Honoraria: Incyte, Takeda, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Roche, Fusion Pharma and IQVIA. Membership on an entity’s board of directors or advisory committees: Incyte, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Roche and Fusion Pharma. PC: Consulting or advisory role: Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly. Speakers’ bureau: Roche/Genentech, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Tesaro and BMS. Research funding: Roche, Novartis, Merck KGaA and BMS (fees paid to institution). Expert testimony: Roche and AstraZeneca. Travel, accommodations, expenses: Novartis, Celgene, AstraZeneca and Pfizer. PL: Advisory board member: Abbvie, GenMab, Genentech, CytomX, Takeda, Cybrexa, Agenus, IQVIA, TRIGR, Pfizer, ImmunoMet, Black Diamond, Glaxo-Smith Kline, QED Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Shattuck, Astellas, Salarius, Silverback, MacroGenics, Kyowa Kirin Pharmaceutical Development, Kineta, Inc., Zentalis Pharmaceuticals, Molecular Templates, ABL Bio, STCube Pharmaceuticals, Bayer and I-Mab. Data Safety Monitoring Board: Agios and Halozyme. Data Safety Monitoring Committee: Five Prime and Tyme. ImCORE Alliance: Roche-Genentech. Consultant: Sotio, SK Life Science and I-Mab. RD: Intermittent, project focused consulting and/or advisory relationships with Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Roche, Amgen, Takeda, Pierre Fabre, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Catalym, Second Genome, Regeneron, Alligator, T3 Pharma, MaxiVAX SA, Pfizer and touchIME outside the submitted work. SP: Consultation/advisory role: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, Biocartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Elsevier, Foundation Medicine, Illumina, Imedex, IQVIA, Incyte, Janssen, Medscape, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Novartis, Pharma Mar, Phosplatin Therapeutics, PER, Pfizer, PRIME, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, RTP, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Takeda. Talk in a company’s organized public event: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, ecancer, Eli Lilly, Illumina, Imedex, Medscape, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, PER, Pfizer, Prime, Roche/Genentech, RTP, Sanofi and Takeda. Receipt of grants/research supports: (Sub)investigator in trials (institutional financial support for clinical trials) sponsored by Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biodesix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis, GSK, Illumina, Lilly, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Mirati, Novartis, Pfizer, Phosplatin Therapeutics and Roche/Genentech. All fees to institution. TC: Research/advisory boards/consultancy/honorarium (institutional and personal): AstraZeneca, Aravive, Aveo, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, EMD Serono, Exelixis, GlaxoSmithKline, IQVA, Ipsen, Kanaph, Lilly, Merck, Nikang, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi/Aventis, Takeda, Tempest, Up-To-Date and CME events (Peerview, OncLive and others). Supported in part by the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Kidney SPORE and Program, the Kohlberg Chair at Harvard Medical School and the Trust Family, Michael Brigham and Loker Pinard Funds for Kidney Cancer Research at DFCI. TM: Honoraria for speaker, consultancy or advisory role: AstraZeneca, AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, BI, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Blueprint Medicines, Berry Oncology, CStone Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Fishawack Facilitate, Eisai, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, G1 Therapeutics, Hengrui, Ignyta, IQVIA, Incyte Corporation, Inivata, InMed Medical Communication, Lucence Health Inc, Janssen, Loxo-Oncology, Qiming Dev., Lunit USA, Inc, Merck Serono, MSD, Roche, LiangyiHui Co., MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, Mirati Therapeutics, MoreHealth, Novartis, OrigiMed, Puma Tech, PeerVoice, PER, Permanyer SL, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Touch Medical Media, Shanghai BeBirds, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, Virtus Medical, Yuhan and Curio Science. Leadership role/board of directors: Sanomics Ltd., Hutchinson Chi-Med, AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, and Lunit USA, Inc. Stocks or ownership interest: Sanomics Ltd., Hutchinson Chi-Med, Biolidics Ltd., Loxo-Oncology, OrigiMed Co., Virtus Medical Group and Lunit USA, Inc. Clinical trials: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, XCovery, Takeda, G1 Therapeutics and Clovis Oncology (fees to institution). The remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immunotherapy represents the standard of care in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either as monotherapy in high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors (≥50%) or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy regardless of PD-L1 status. However, most pivotal clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) did not include patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2. Hence, a consensus is lacking on the safety and efficacy of ICIs in this specific subgroup of patients., Materials and Methods: A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2021 with the aim of reviewing the available evidence on the use of ICIs in NSCLC patients with ECOG PS 2, both in clinical practice and in a research setting., Results: All panelists expressed concern about the applicability of currently available PS scales to evaluate patients for ICI treatment. The panelists agreed that, though limited, the available data support the safety of single-agent immunotherapy in PS 2 NSCLC patients, whereas concern was raised on the safety of ICI combinations, mainly related to chemotherapy and/or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 toxicity. On the basis of reviewed data, ICI efficacy may be speculated in PS 2 NSCLC patients; however, PS 2 remains a negative prognostic category as compared to PS 0-1 in patients treated with ICI, as it is for chemotherapy. The panelists defined high, medium and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to the inclusion of PS 2 patients in prospective clinical trials and the specific evaluation of combined ICI treatments with attenuated chemotherapy doses., Conclusions: Based on the current evidence, the panelists outlined the major limitations affecting PS 2 patients with NSCLC and reached common considerations on the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations in the first-line setting., Competing Interests: Disclosure CG received honoraria as speaker bureau or advisory board member or as consultant from MSD, BMS, Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Menarini, Boehringer, Karyopharm and Eli Lilly. SP reports personal fees for speaking or attending advisory boards, and has participated in investigation in trials for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Illumina, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck Serono, Novartis and Pfizer; and personal fees for speaking or attending advisory boards for AbbVie, Bayer, Biocartis, Bioinvent, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, ecancer, Foundation Medicine, Janssen, Lilly, Medscape, Merrimack, Pharma Mar, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Takeda (all fees to institution). TM reported receiving personal fees, grants or other fees from AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma Co Ltd, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics Co Ltd, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Fishawack Facilitate Ltd, geneDecode, Gritstone Oncology Inc, Guardant Health, Hengrui Therapeutics, Ignyta Inc, IQVIA, Incyte Corporation, InMed Medical Communication, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo-Oncology, Lunit Inc, MD Health (Brazil), Medscape/WebMD, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati Therapeutics Inc, MORE Health, Novartis, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, Physicians' Education Resource, Permanyer SL, Pfizer Inc, PrIME Oncology, Puma Technology Inc, Research to Practice, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis R&D, Takeda, Touch Medical Media, Virtus Medical Group, Yuhan Corporation, AstraZeneca PLC, Hutchison Chi-Med, Sanomics Ltd, Clovis Oncology, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Xcovery, Curio Science, Inivata, Berry Oncology, G1 Therapeutics Inc and Aurora. PMF received honoraria or consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Janssen, Iteos, Flame, Sanofi, Genentech, F-Star, G1 therapeutics and Surface Oncology; and research funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Kyowa, Corvus and Novartis. MR reports honoraria for consultancy and lecture roles from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Merck, Mirati, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis and Pfizer. FdM received honoraria or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Novartis, Takeda, Xcovery and Roche. IA has declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Blood First Assay Screening Trial is an ongoing open-label, multicohort study, prospectively evaluating the relationship between blood-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) detection of actionable genetic alterations and activity of targeted therapies or immunotherapy in treatment-naive advanced or metastatic NSCLC. We present data from the ALK-positive cohort., Methods: Patients aged more than or equal to 18 years with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and ALK rearrangements detected by blood-based NGS using hybrid capture technology (FoundationACT) received alectinib 600 mg twice daily. Asymptomatic or treated central nervous system (CNS) metastases were permitted. Primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). Secondary end points were independent review facility-assessed ORR, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. Exploratory end points were investigator-assessed ORR in patients with baseline CNS metastases and relationship between circulating biomarkers and response., Results: In total, 2219 patients were screened and blood-based NGS yielded results in 98.6% of the cases. Of these, 119 patients (5.4%) had ALK-positive disease; 87 were enrolled and received alectinib. Median follow-up was 12.6 months (range: 2.6-18.7). Confirmed ORR was 87.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.5-93.5) by investigator and 92.0% (95% CI: 84.1-96.7) by independent review facility. Investigator-confirmed 12-month duration of response was 75.9% (95% CI: 63.6-88.2). In 35 patients (40%) with baseline CNS disease, investigator-assessed ORR was 91.4% (95% CI: 76.9-98.2). Median PFS was not reached; 12-month investigator-assessed PFS was 78.4% (95% CI: 69.1-87.7). Safety data were consistent with the known tolerability profile of alectinib., Conclusions: These results reveal the clinical application of blood-based NGS as a method to inform clinical decision-making in ALK-positive NSCLC., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Acquired resistance (AR) to programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] blockade is frequent in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), occurring in a majority of initial responders. Patients with AR may have unique properties of persistent antitumor immunity that could be re-harnessed by investigational immunotherapies. The absence of a consistent clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade and lack of uniform criteria for ensuing enrollment in clinical trials remains a major barrier to progress; such clinical definitions have advanced biologic and therapeutic discovery. We examine the considerations and potential controversies in developing a patient-level definition of AR in NSCLC treated with PD-(L)1 blockade. Taking into account the specifics of NSCLC biology and corresponding treatment strategies, we propose a practical, clinical definition of AR to PD-(L)1 blockade for use in clinical reports and prospective clinical trials. Patients should meet the following criteria: received treatment that includes PD-(L)1 blockade; experienced objective response on PD-(L)1 blockade (inclusion of a subset of stable disease will require future investigation); have progressive disease occurring within 6 months of last anti-PD-(L)1 antibody treatment or rechallenge with anti-PD-(L)1 antibody in patients not exposed to anti-PD-(L)1 in 6 months., Competing Interests: Disclosure AJS reports consulting/advising role to J&J and Perceptive Advisors. SJA reports consulting/advising role from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, CBMG, AstraZeneca, Memgen, RAPT, and Venn, Achilles Therapeutics, Celsius, Samyang Biopharma, Glaxo Smith Klein, Amgen, other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Rapt, Achilles Therapeutics, Celsius, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, grants from Novartis; expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, CBMG, AstraZeneca, Memgen, RAPT, and Venn, Achilles Therapeutics, Celsius, Samyang Biopharma, Glaxo Smith Klein, Amgen, other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Rapt, Achilles Therapeutics, Celsius, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, grants from Novartis. MMA reports grants and personal fees from Genentech, grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Merck, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from Lilly, personal fees from Maverick, personal fees from Blueprint Medicine, personal fees from Syndax, personal fees from Ariad, personal fees from Nektar, personal fees from Gritstone, personal fees from ArcherDx, personal fees from Mirati, personal fees from NextCure, personal fees from EMD Serono. EF reports personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Blue Print Medicines, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Medscape, personal fees from Merck KGaA, personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from PeerVoice, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from prIME Oncology, personal fees from Puma Biotechnology, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Sanofi Genzyme, personal fees from Springer, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from TouchIME, grants from Grant for Oncology Innovation (GOI), grants from Fundación Merck Salud, outside the submitted work; and Grífols: Independent Member of the Board. JG reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Genentech/Roche, personal fees from Takeda, grants and personal fees from Blueprint, grants and personal fees from Loxo, personal fees from Oncorus, personal fees from Regeneron, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Incyte, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Agios, personal fees from Amgen, grants from Array, grants from Tesaro, grants from Moderna, grants from Adaptimmune, grants from Alexo, personal fees from Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from EMD Serono, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Mirati. SNG reports personal fees and other from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Nektar, other from Genentech, other from Ariad/Takeda, other from Iovance Biotherapeutics, during the conduct of the study. FSH reports grants, personal fees and other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from EMD Serono, grants, personal fees and other from Novartis, personal fees from Surface, personal fees from Compass Therapeutics, personal fees from Apricity, personal fees from Aduro, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Pionyr, personal fees from 7 Hills Pharma, personal fees from Verastem, personal fees from Torque, personal fees from Rheos, personal fees from Kairos, personal fees from Bicara, from Psioxus Therapeutics, other from Pieris Pharmaceutical, from Zumutor, from Corner Therapeutics, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Checkpoint Therapeutics, outside the submitted work; In addition, FSH has a patent Methods for Treating MICA-Related Disorders (#20100111973) with royalties paid, a patent Tumor antigens and uses thereof (#7250291) issued, a patent Angiopoiten-2 Biomarkers Predictive of Anti-immune checkpoint response (#20170248603) pending, a patent Compositions and Methods for Identification, Assessment, Prevention, and Treatment of Melanoma using PD-L1 Isoforms (#20160340407) pending, a patent Therapeutic peptides (#20160046716) pending, a patent Therapeutic Peptides (#20140004112) pending, a patent Therapeutic Peptides (#20170022275) pending, a patent Therapeutic Peptides (#20170008962) pending, a patent Therapeutic Peptides Patent number: 9402905 issued, a patent Methods of using pembrolizumab and trebananib pending, a patent Vaccine compositions and methods for restoring NKG2D pathway function against cancers Patent number: 10279021 issued, a patent Antibodies that bind to MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A Patent number: 10106611 issued, and a patent Anti- galectin antibody biomarkers predictive of anti-immune checkpoint and anti-angiogenesis responses. Publication number: 20170343552 pending. MLJ reports other from Achilles Therapeutics, grants and other from AstraZeneca, grants and other from Atreca, grants and other from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and other from Calithera Biosciences, grants and other from EMD Serono, grants and other from Roche/Genentech, grants and other from GlaxoSmithKline, grants and other from Gritstone Oncology, grants and other from Guardant Health, grants and other from Incyte, grants and other from Janssen Research and Development, grants and other from Lilly, grants and other from Merck, grants and other from Mirati Therapeutics, grants and other from Novartis, grants and other from Pfizer, grants and other from Sanofi-Aventis, grants from AbbVie, grants from Acerta Pharma, grants from Adaptimmune, grants and other from Amgen, grants from Apexigen, grants from Array BioPharma, grants from BeiGene, grants from Checkpoint Therapeutics, grants from Corvus Pharmaceuticals, grants from CytomX, grants and other from Daiichi Sankyo, grants from Dynavax Technologies, grants from Genmab, grants from Genocea Biosciences, grants from Hengrui Therapeutics, grants from Immunocore, grants from Jounce Therapeutics, grants from Kadmon Pharmaceuticals, grants from Loxo Oncology, grants from Lycera, grants from Neovia Oncology, grants from OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, grants from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, grants from Shattuck Labs, grants from Stem CentRx, grants from Syndax Pharmaceuticals, grants from Takeda Pharmaceuticals, grants from Tarveda, grants from University of Michigan, grants and other from WindMIL Therapeutics, grants from TCR2 Therapeutics, grants from Arcus Biosciences, grants and other from Ribon Therapeutics, grants from Seven and Eight Biopharmaceuticals, other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Astellas, personal fees from Otsuka, grants from BerGenBio, grants from Foundation Medicine, other from G1 Therapeutics, grants from Tmunity Therapeutics. NBL reports grants and personal fees for CME lectures from MSD and BMS. CML reports other from Cepheid, other from Syros, other from Foundation Medicine, other from Novartis, other from Astra Zeneca, other from Takeda, other from Amgen, other from Blueprints Medicine, other from Genentech, other from Eli Lilly/Loxo, other from Pfizer, other from Roche, other from Achilles, from null, outside the submitted work. TM reports personal fees from AbbVie, Inc., personal fees and other from ACEA Pharma, personal fees and other from Alpha Biopharma Co. Ltd., personal fees and other from Amgen, personal fees and other from Amoy Diagnostics Co. Ltd., grants, personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, personal fees and other from BeiGene, personal fees and other from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants, personal fees and other from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees and other from Blueprint Medicines Corporation, personal fees and other from CStone Pharmaceuticals, personal fees and other from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees and other from Eisai, personal fees and other from Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., other from geneDecode, personal fees and other from Gritstone Oncology Inc., personal fees and other from Guardant Health, personal fees and other from Hengrui Therapeutics, personal fees and other from Ignyta Inc., personal fees and other from IQVIA, personal fees and other from Incyte Corporation, personal fees from InMed Medical Communication, personal fees and other from Janssen, personal fees and other from Lilly, personal fees and other from Loxo-Oncology, personal fees and other from Lunit, Inc., personal fees from MD Health (Brazil), personal fees from Medscape/WebMD, grants, personal fees and other from Merck Serono, grants, personal fees and other from Merck Sharp & Dohme, personal fees and other from Mirati Therapeutics Inc., personal fees from MoreHealth, grants, personal fees and other from Novartis, personal fees and other from OrigiMed, personal fees from PeerVoice, personal fees from Physicians' Education Resource, personal fees from P. Permanyer SL, grants, personal fees and other from Pfizer, Inc, personal fees from prIME Oncology, personal fees and other from Puma Technology Inc, personal fees from Research to Practice, grants, personal fees and other from Roche, personal fees and other from Sanofi-Aventis R&D, personal fees and other from Takeda, personal fees from Touch Medical Media, other from Virtus Medical Group, personal fees and other from Yuhan Corporation, other from AstraZeneca PLC, other from Hutchison Chi-Med, other from Sanomics Ltd., grants from Clovis Oncology, grants from SFJ Pharmaceuticals, grants from XCovery, outside the submitted work. MP reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from ELI LILLY, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees and non-financial support from B Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Takeda, personal fees and non-financial support from Chugai, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Illumina, personal fees from Gritstone, outside the submitted work. MR reports personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Mirati, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Samsung, outside the submitted work. BS reports personal fees from Roche/Genentech, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from Loxo Oncology, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from PharmaMar, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. J-CS reports other from AstraZeneca, other from AstraZeneca, during the conduct of the study; other from Gritstone Oncology, other from Daiichi Sankyo, other from Relay Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. DSWT reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Celgene, grants and personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from LOXO, personal fees from Merck, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Takeda, grants from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Merrimack, outside the submitted work. SP reports personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Biocartis, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Bistrol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Clovis, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Debiopharm, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from F. Hoffmann-La Roche, personal fees from Foundation Medicine, personal fees from Illumina, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Merrimack, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pharma Mar, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Regeneron, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Seattle Genetics and Takeda, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from F. Hoffmann-La Roche, personal fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Takeda, non-financial support from Sponsored by Amgen, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, non-financial support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, non-financial support from Bristol-Meyers Squibb, non-financial support from Clovis, non-financial support from F. Hoffmann-La Roche, non-financial support from Illumina, non-financial support from Merck Sharp and Dohme, non-financial support from Merck Serono, non-financial support from Novartis, non-financial support from Pfizer, non-financial support from Sanofi, personal fees from Bioinvent, outside the submitted work. All fees to institution. MDH reports personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Genentech/Roche, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Mirati, personal fees from Syndax, personal fees and other from Shattuck Labs, personal fees from Nektar, personal fees and other from Immunai, personal fees and other from Arcus, from Eli Lilly, during the conduct of the study; In addition, Dr. Hellmann has a patent A patent filed by Memorial Sloan Kettering related to the use of tumor mutational burden to predict response to immunotherapy (PCT/US2015/062208) licensed to PGDx., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Although precision medicine has had a mixed impact on the clinical management of patients with advanced-stage cancer overall, for NSCLC, and more specifically for lung adenocarcinoma, the advances have been dramatic, largely owing to the genomic complexity and growing number of druggable oncogene drivers. Furthermore, although tumor tissue is historically the "accepted standard" biospecimen for these molecular analyses, there are considerable innate limitations. Thus, liquid biopsy represents a practical alternative source for investigating tumor-derived somatic alterations. Although data are most robust in NSCLC, patients with other cancer types may also benefit from this minimally invasive approach to facilitate selection of targeted therapies. The liquid biopsy approach includes a variety of methodologies for circulating analytes. From a clinical point of view, plasma circulating tumor DNA is the most extensively studied and widely adopted alternative to tissue tumor genotyping in solid tumors, including NSCLC, first entering clinical practice for detection of EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Since the publication of the first International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) liquid biopsy statement in 2018, several additional advances have been made in this field, leading to changes in the therapeutic decision-making algorithm for advanced NSCLC and prompting this 2021 update. In view of the novel and impressive technological advances made in the past few years, the growing clinical application of plasma-based, next-generation sequencing, and the recent Food and Drug and Administration approval in the United States of two different assays for circulating tumor DNA analysis, IASLC revisited the role of liquid biopsy in therapeutic decision-making in a recent workshop in October 2020 and the question of "plasma first" versus "tissue first" approach toward molecular testing for advanced NSCLC. Moreover, evidence-based recommendations from IASLC provide an international perspective on when to order which test and how to interpret the results. Here, we present updates and additional considerations to the previous statement article as a consensus from a multidisciplinary and international team of experts selected by IASLC., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The first-line treatment of choice for patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC is an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), of which five as follows are predominantly available in practice: gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, and osimertinib. Most prospective clinical trial data with these agents are limited to patients with the common activating and sensitizing EGFR mutations as follows: exon 19 deletions and exon 21 L858R point mutations. However, 10% to 20% of patients with NSCLC harbor uncommon EGFR mutations that have variable sensitivity to different EGFR TKIs. Owing to their molecular structures, afatinib, dacomitinib, and osimertinib have broader inhibitory profiles than the first-generation agents, gefitinib and erlotinib. Nevertheless, the paucity of prospective clinical data, the wide heterogeneity of uncommon mutations, and the existence of compound mutations in up to 25% of the cases complicate treatment decisions in this patient subgroup. Here, we collate the latest preclinical and clinical data regarding the activity of different TKIs against major uncommon EGFR mutations including compound mutations, but excluding exon 20 insertions which are generally insensitive to TKIs. On the basis of these data, we offer suggestions regarding treatment strategies for uncommon EGFR mutations. Moving forward, it will be important to include uncommon EGFR mutations in the first-line molecular analysis of all patients with adenocarcinoma of the lung, as this will help optimize patient outcomes according to their precise genotype., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: We retrospectively examined progression-free survival (PFS) and response by ALK fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) status in patients with advanced ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive NSCLC in the ALEX study., Methods: A total of 303 treatment-naive patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. ALK status was assessed centrally using Ventana ALK (D5F3) CDx IHC and Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH Probe Kit. Primary end point is investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points of interest are objective response rate and duration., Results: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly prolonged with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive tumors (n = 203, 67%) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.56; p < 0.0001) and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative tumors (n = 61, 20%) (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.78) but not in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors (n = 39, 13%) (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.6-3.2). Objective response rates were higher with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive tumors (90.6% versus 81.4%; stratified OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 0.97-5.07) and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative tumors (96.0% versus 75.0%; OR = 9.29, 95% CI: 1.05-81.88) but not in ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors (28.6% versus 44.4%; OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.12-1.74). Next-generation sequencing was performed in 35 of 39 patients with ALK IHC-positive and FISH-negative tumors; no ALK fusion was identified in 20 of 35 patients (57.1%) by next-generation sequencing, but 10 of 20 (50.0%) had partial response or stable disease., Conclusions: Outcomes of patients with ALK IHC-positive and FISH-positive and ALK IHC-positive and FISH-uninformative NSCLC were similar to those of the overall ALEX population. These results suggest that Ventana ALK IHC is a standard testing method for selecting patients for treatment with alectinib., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In AURA3 (NCT02151981), osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), significantly prolonged progression-free survival and improved response in patients with EGFR T790M advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and progression on prior EGFR-TKI treatment. We report the final AURA3 overall survival (OS) analysis., Patients and Methods: Adult patients were randomized 2 : 1 to osimertinib (80 mg orally, once daily) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin/cisplatin (platinum-pemetrexed) intravenously, every 3 weeks (≤6 cycles). Patients could crossover to osimertinib on progression confirmed by blinded independent central review. OS and safety were secondary end points., Results: A total of 279 patients were randomly assigned to receive osimertinib and 140 to platinum-pemetrexed (136 received treatment). At data cut-off (DCO; 15 March 2019), 188 patients (67%) receiving osimertinib versus 93 (66%) receiving platinum-pemetrexed had died. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.12; P = 0.277]; the median OS was 26.8 months (95% CI 23.5-31.5) versus 22.5 months (95% CI 20.2-28.8) for osimertinib and platinum-pemetrexed, respectively. The estimated 24- and 36-month survival was 55% versus 43% and 37% versus 30%, respectively. After crossover adjustment, there was an HR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.18-1.6). Time to first subsequent therapy or death showed a clinically meaningful advantage toward osimertinib (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.28; P < 0.001). At DCO, 99/136 (73%) patients in the platinum-pemetrexed arm had crossed over to osimertinib, 66/99 (67%) of whom had died. The most common adverse events possibly related to study treatment were diarrhea (32%; grade ≥3, 1%) and rash (grouped term; 32%; grade ≥3, <1%) in the osimertinib arm, versus nausea (47%; grade ≥3, 3%) in the platinum-pemetrexed arm., Conclusions: In patients with T790M advanced NSCLC, no statistically significant benefit in OS was observed for osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed, which possibly reflects the high crossover rate of patients from platinum-pemetrexed to osimertinib., Clinical Trials Number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02151981; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02151981., Competing Interests: Disclosures VAP has declared honorarium from F Hoffman-La Roche; advisory or consultancy fees from Nektar Therapeutics, Astra Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Arrys Therapeutics, Merck & Co, LOXO Oncology, Araxes Pharma, F. Hoffman–LaRoche Ltd, Janssen Research Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly & Co, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., Takeda Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, TRM Oncology, Tesaro, Exelixis, Gritstone, Leeds Biolabs, IDEAYA, Bolt Therapeutics, and G2 Innovation; and research funding from Eli Lilly & Co, Novartis, Merck, Astra Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, F Hoffman-La Roche, Nektar Therapeutics, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Checkmate, and Incyte. TSM has declared honoraria from ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, Hengrui Therapeutics, Ignyta, Incyte Corporation, InMed Medical Communication, IQVIA, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Merck Serono, MSD, MORE Health, Novartis, OncoGenex Pharmaceuticals, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis R&D, SFJ Pharmaceutical, Takeda Pharmaceuticals HK, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Yuhan Corporation; advisory or consultancy fees from ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Cirina, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Fishawack Facilitate, GeneDecode, Hengrui Therapeutics, Ignyta, Incyte Corporation, InMed Medical Communication, IQVIA, Janssen, Loxo-Oncology, Merck Serono, MSD, MORE Health, Novartis, OncoGenex Pharmaceuticals, OrigiMed, PeerVoice, Pfizer, PrIME Oncology, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi-Aventis R&D, SFJ Pharmaceutical, Takeda Pharmaceuticals HK, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and Yuhan Corporation; leadership roles for AstraZeneca and Hutchison Chi-Med; research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ, and Xcovery; shareholdings in Hutchison Chi-Med, and Sanomics; stock options in Clearbridge BioMedics (now Biolidics), Loxo-Oncology, OrigiMed, and Virtus Medical Group; and officer or director for AstraZeneca, Hutchison Chi-Med (remunerated), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group (ATORG), Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited (CLCRF), Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO), Hong Kong Cancer Fund (HKCF), Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society (HKCTS), and International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC; term ended on 30/4/19 [non-remunerated]). J-YH has declared honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, and Takeda; advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Novartis, and Lilly; research funding from Roche, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Takeda. M-JA has declared advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Lilly; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, Lilly, Roche, Alpha Pharmaceutical, and Takeda. SSR has declared honoraria from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Loxo, Nektar, and Tesaro; advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Loxo, Nektar, and Tesaro; and research funding from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Tesaro, Advaxis, and Takeda. SWK has declared advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca; and research funding from AstraZeneca. FAS has declared advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca; research funding from AstraZeneca; and shareholdings in AstraZeneca. JL has declared honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and research funding from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. HA has declared honoraria from AstraZeneca, Chugai, Pfizer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca and Pfizer. W-CS has declared travel, accommodation, or expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer Ingelheim. TJ has declared advisory or consultancy fees from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Ignyta, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer. MS has declared honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Celgene, Takeda, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and MSD; advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Celgene, Takeda, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and MSD; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Celgene, Takeda, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and MSD. Y-LW has declared honoraria from AstraZeneca, Roche, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Boehringer Ingelheim; advisory or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca and Roche; and research funding from AstraZeneca and Roche. HM, MM, GL, and YR are employees of and have shareholdings in AstraZeneca. AD, YH, and WSMET have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: We retrospectively examined progression-free survival (PFS) and response by ALK fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) status in patients with advanced ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the ALEX study., Methods: 303 treatment-naïve patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. ALK status was assessed centrally using Ventana ALK (D5F3) CDx IHC and Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH Probe Kit. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary endpoints of interest: objective response rate (ORR) and duration., Results: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly prolonged with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive tumors (n = 203, 67%) (HR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.25-0.56) and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative tumors (n = 61, 20%) (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.78), but not ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors (n = 39, 13%) (HR 1.33, 95% CI: 0.6-3.2). ORRs were higher with alectinib versus crizotinib in ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive tumors 90.6% versus 81.4%; stratified odds ratio [OR] 2.22, 95% CI: 0.97-5.07) and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative tumors (96.0% versus 75.0%; OR 9.29, 95% CI: 1.05-81.88), but not ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors (28.6% versus 44.4%; OR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.12-1.74). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed in 35/39 patients with ALK IHC-positive/FISH-negative tumors; no ALK fusion was identified in 20/35 (57.1%) patients by NGS, but 10/20 (50.0%) had partial response/stable disease., Conclusion: Outcomes of patients with ALK IHC-positive/FISH-positive and ALK IHC-positive/FISH-uninformative NSCLC were similar to the overall ALEX population. These results suggest that Ventana ALK IHC is a standard testing method for selecting patients for treatment with alectinib., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The ALEX study demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the primary data cut-off (9 February 2017). We report mature PFS (cut-off: 30 November 2018) and overall survival (OS) data up to 5 years (cut-off: 29 November 2019)., Patients and Methods: Patients with stage III/IV ALK-positive NSCLC were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib 600 mg (n = 152) or crizotinib 250 mg (n = 151) until disease progression, toxicity, withdrawal or death. Primary end point: investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points included objective response rate, OS and safety., Results: Mature PFS data showed significantly prolonged investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.58; median PFS 34.8 versus 10.9 months crizotinib]. Median duration of OS follow-up: 48.2 months alectinib, 23.3 months crizotinib. OS data remain immature (37% of events). Median OS was not reached with alectinib versus 57.4 months with crizotinib (stratified HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98). The 5-year OS rate was 62.5% (95% CI 54.3-70.8) with alectinib and 45.5% (95% CI 33.6-57.4) with crizotinib, with 34.9% and 8.6% of patients still on study treatment, respectively. The OS benefit of alectinib was seen in patients with central nervous system metastases at baseline [HR 0.58 (95% CI 0.34-1.00)] and those without [HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.45-1.26)]. Median treatment duration was longer with alectinib (28.1 versus 10.8 months), and no new safety signals were observed., Conclusions: Mature PFS data from ALEX confirmed significant improvement in PFS for alectinib over crizotinib in ALK-positive NSCLC. OS data remain immature, with a higher 5-year OS rate with alectinib versus crizotinib. This is the first global randomized study to show clinically meaningful improvement in OS for a next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor versus crizotinib in treatment-naive ALK-positive NSCLC., Clinical Trials Number: NCT02075840., Competing Interests: Disclosure TM declares a leadership role with Sanonics Ltd, Hutchinson ChiMed and AstraZeneca; honoraria/consulting fees from ACEA Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Celgene, Chimed, Cirina, Fishawack Facilitate, Ignyta, Janssen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, OncoGenex, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, SFJ Pharmaceutical, Takeda and Vertex; and research funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Clovis Oncology, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceutical and XCovery. DRC declares honoraria/consulting fees from Abbvie, Ariad, Array, Celgene, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, Genoptix, G1 Therapeutics, Novartis, Orion and Roche/Genentech. SMG declares honoraria/consulting fees from Ariad, AstraZeneca, BMS, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech. RR has nothing to disclose. RD declares honoraria/consulting fees from Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Yuhan, XCovery, SeattleGenetics and Celon Pharma. DWK declares non-financial support from Roche for travel to meetings for the study, and provision of writing assistance, medicines, equipment or administrative support; and non-financial support from Amgen and Daiichi-Sankyo for travel to advisory meetings. His institution has received funding from Alpha Biopharma, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Hanmi, Janssen, Merus, Mirati Therapeutics, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, TP Therapeutics, XCovery and Yuhan. MP declares honoraria/consulting fees from Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Clovis Oncology, MSD, Chugai, BMS, Amgen, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca and Takeda; and institutional grants for clinical/translational research from Roche, AstraZeneca, Chugai and Takeda. SHIO declares honoraria/consultancy fees from ARIAD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech and TP Therapeutics; speakers' bureau participation for ARIAD, AstraZeneca and Roche/Genentech; research funding from ARIAD, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer and Roche/Genentech; and stock ownership in TP Therapeutics. JSA declares honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Menarini, Roche, Eisai, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS-Ono, MSD, Janssen, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda and Amgen. ATS is currently an employee of Novartis and has received honoraria or consulting fees from F. Hoffmann La-Roche Ltd, Genentech, Pfizer, Novartis, Ariad, Ignyta, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho, Blueprint medicines, LOXO, EMD Serono and Foundation medicine. WB, VS, MH, JN and TR are employees of F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. SP declares educational grants or honoraria for advisory board attendance and/or lectures from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biocartis, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, Roche, Foundation Medicine, Illumina, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Novartis, Pharma Mar, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Takeda., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) of the lung is a heterogeneous disease that is composed of both adenocarcinoma components (ACC) and squamous cell carcinoma components (SCCC). Their genomic profile, genetic origin, and clinical management remain controversial., Patients and Methods: Resected ASC and metastatic tumor in regional lymph nodes (LNs) were collected. The ACC and SCCC were separated by microdissection of primary tumor. The 1021 cancer-related genes were evaluated by next-generation sequencing independently in ACC and SCCC and LNs. Shared and private alterations in the two components were investigated. In addition, genomic profiles of independent cohorts of adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas were examined for comparison. We have also carried out a retrospective study of ASCs with known EGFR mutation status from 11 hospitals in China for their clinical outcomes., Results: The most frequent alterations in 28 surgically resected ASCs include EGFR (79%), TP53 (68%), MAP3K1 (14%) mutations, EGFR amplifications (32%), and MDM2 amplifications (18%). Twenty-seven patients (96%) had shared variations between ACC and SCCC, and pure SCCC metastases were not found in metastatic LNs among these patients. Only one patient with geographically separated ACC and SCCC had no shared mutations. Inter-component heterogeneity was a common genetic event of ACC and SCCC. The genomic profile of ASC was similar to that of 170 adenocarcinomas, but different from that of 62 squamous cell carcinomas. The incidence of EGFR mutations in the retrospective analysis of 517 ASCs was 51.8%. Among the 129 EGFR-positive patients who received EGFR-TKIs, the objective response rate was 56.6% and the median progression-free survival was 10.1 months (95% confidence interval: 9.0-11.2)., Conclusions: The ACC and SCCC share a monoclonal origin, a majority with genetically inter-component heterogeneity. ASC may represent a subtype of adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutation being the most common genomic anomaly and sharing similar efficacy to EGFR TKI., Competing Interests: Disclosure TSKM reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Clovis Oncology, and Taiho; personal fees from Eli Lilly, Merck Serono, Vertex, ACEA Biosciences, Oncogenex, Celgene, and Ignyta; an uncompensated relationship with geneDecode and Cirina; grants from Eisai; and ownership of stock in Samomics Ltd. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The phase II, single-arm ASCEND-3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ceritinib in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor (ALKi)-naive patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC who had received at least three previous lines of chemotherapy. Here, we report the final efficacy and safety results., Methods: Eligible patients (including those with asymptomatic or neurologically stable brain metastases) received oral ceritinib (750 mg/day, fasted). The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). Secondary end points were Blinded Independent Review Committee-assessed ORR; investigator- and Blinded Independent Review Committee-assessed overall intracranial response rate, duration of response, time to response, disease control rate, and progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS); and safety. Exploratory end points included patient-reported outcomes., Results: Of the 124 patients enrolled, 122 (98.4%) had received previous antineoplastic medications (31 patients [25.0%] received at least three regimens), and 49 (39.5%) had baseline brain metastases. The median follow-up time (data cutoff: January 22, 2018) was 52.1 (range, 48.4-60.1) months. The investigator-assessed ORR was 67.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.8-75.9), and the median PFS was 16.6 months (95% CI: 11.0-23.2). The median OS was 51.3 months (95% CI: 42.7-55.3). Most common adverse events (all grades, ≥60% of patients, all-causality) were diarrhea (85.5%), nausea (78.2%), and vomiting (71.8%). Overall, 18 patients (14.5%) had an adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. Health-related quality of life was maintained during ceritinib treatment., Conclusions: Ceritinib exhibited prolonged and clinically meaningful OS, PFS, and duration of response in chemotherapy-pretreated (at least three lines), ALKi-naive patients with ALK+ NSCLC. The safety profile was consistent with that reported in previous studies., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Osimertinib has shown promising activity in patients with leptomeningeal metastases (LMs) of EGFR-positive NSCLC at 160 mg once daily (qd) (BLOOM; NCT02228369). We report LM activity with osimertinib (80 mg qd) in a retrospective analysis of studies across the AURA program (AURA extension, AURA2, AURA17, and AURA3)., Methods: Patients with EGFR T790M-positive advanced NSCLC and progression after previous EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy received osimertinib (80 mg qd). Patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases (including LMs) were eligible if the lesions were neurologically asymptomatic and stable. Patients with evidence of LMs at the study entry were retrospectively included for the analysis; brain scans were assessed for radiologic LM response by neuroradiologically blinded, independent central review per the modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology LM criteria. LM objective response rate, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were assessed. A longitudinal analysis was performed to investigate the relationship between changes from the baseline in non-CNS tumor sizes and LM responses at each visit of patients in AURA LM and BLOOM studies., Results: For the 22 patients included in the analysis, LM objective response rate was 55% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32-76). Median LM duration of response was not reached (95% CI: 2.8-not calculable [NC]). Median LM progression-free survival and overall survival were 11.1 months (95% CI: 4.6-NC) and 18.8 months (95% CI: 6.3-NC), respectively. The longitudinal analysis revealed similar non-CNS and LM responses between the patients in AURA LM and BLOOM programs., Conclusions: Patients with EGFR T790M-positive NSCLC and radiologically detected LM obtained clinical benefit from osimertinib (80 mg qd)., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: At the prior data cutoff (February 9, 2017) the ALEX trial showed superior investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) for alectinib versus crizotinib in untreated, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive, advanced NSCLC (hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.65, p < 0.001). The median PFS in the alectinib arm was not reached versus 11.1 months with crizotinib. Retrospective analyses suggest that the echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 gene-ALK variant (EML4-ALK) may influence ALK-inhibitor treatment benefit. We present updated analyses, including exploratory subgroup analysis by EML4-ALK variant, after an additional 10 months' follow-up (cutoff December 1, 2017)., Methods: Patients were randomized to receive twice-daily alectinib, 600 mg, or crizotinib, 250 mg, until disease progression, toxicity, death, or withdrawal. PFS was determined by the investigators. Baseline plasma and tissue biomarker samples were analyzed by using hybrid-capture, next-generation sequencing to determine EML4-ALK variant., Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced. Investigator-assessed PFS was prolonged with alectinib (stratified hazard ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval: 0.32-0.58). The median PFS times were 34.8 months with alectinib and 10.9 months with crizotinib. EML4-ALK fusions were detectable in 129 patient plasma samples and 124 tissue samples; variants 1, 2, and 3/ab did not affect PFS, objective response rate, or duration of response. Investigator-assessed PFS was longer for alectinib than for crizotinib across EML4-ALK variants 1, 2, and 3a/b in plasma and tissue. Despite longer treatment duration (27.0 months in the case of alectinib versus 10.8 months in the case of crizotinib), the safety of alectinib compared favorably with that of crizotinib., Conclusion: Alectinib continues to demonstrate superior investigator-assessed PFS versus crizotinib in untreated ALK-positive NSCLC, irrespective of EML4-ALK variant., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Antibodies that target programmed death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand [programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)] have become a mainstay of first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable genetic alterations. In this review, we summarize results from recent clinical trials that have evaluated the anti-PD-1 antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab and the anti-PD-L1 antibodies atezolizumab and durvalumab as first-line treatment as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy, other immunotherapies, and antiangiogenesis agents. We discuss factors that may influence treatment selection, including patient baseline clinical and demographic characteristics, tumor histology, and biomarkers such as PD-L1 expression and tumor mutation burden. While immunotherapy has become a central component of first-line treatment of most patients with advanced NSCLC, important questions remain about how treatment should be managed for individual patients., (© 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.)

Introduction: Data on immuno-oncology agents in Chinese patients are limited despite a need for new therapies. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in a predominantly Chinese patient population with previously treated NSCLC., Methods: CheckMate 078 was a randomized, open-label, phase III clinical trial in patients from China, Russia, and Singapore with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC that had progressed during/after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02613507). Patients with EGFR/ALK alterations were excluded. Patients (N = 504) were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks), stratified by performance status, tumor histology, and tumor programmed death ligand 1 expression. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included objective response rate, progression-free survival, and safety., Results: OS was significantly improved with nivolumab (n = 338) versus docetaxel (n = 166); median OS (95% confidence interval): 12.0 (10.4-14.0) versus 9.6 (7.6-11.2) months, respectively; hazard ratio (97.7% confidence interval): 0.68 (0.52-0.90); p = 0.0006. Objective response rate was 17% with nivolumab versus 4% with docetaxel; median duration of response was not reached versus 5.3 months. Minimum follow-up was 8.8 months. The frequency of grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events was 10% with nivolumab and 48% with docetaxel., Conclusions: This is the first phase III study in a predominantly Chinese population reporting results with a programmed death 1 inhibitor. In this population with previously treated advanced NSCLC, nivolumab improved OS versus docetaxel. Results were consistent with global CheckMate 017 and 057 studies., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The phase III ALEX study in patients with treatment-naive advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase mutation-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) met its primary end point of improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib. Here, we present detailed central nervous system (CNS) efficacy data from ALEX., Patients and Methods: Overall, 303 patients aged ≥18 years underwent 1:1 randomization to receive twice-daily doses of alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. Brain imaging was conducted in all patients at baseline and every subsequent 8 weeks. End points (analyzed by subgroup: patients with/without baseline CNS metastases; patients with/without prior radiotherapy) included PFS, CNS objective response rate (ORR), and time to CNS progression., Results: In total, 122 patients had Independent Review Committee-assessed baseline CNS metastases (alectinib, n = 64; crizotinib, n = 58), 43 had measurable lesions (alectinib, n = 21; crizotinib, n = 22), and 46 had received prior radiotherapy (alectinib, n = 25; crizotinib, n = 21). Investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib was consistent between patients with baseline CNS metastases [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.64] and those without (HR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.80, P interaction = 0.36). Similar results were seen in patients regardless of prior radiotherapy. Time to CNS progression was significantly longer with alectinib versus crizotinib and comparable between patients with and without baseline CNS metastases (P < 0.0001). CNS ORR was 85.7% with alectinib versus 71.4% with crizotinib in patients who received prior radiotherapy and 78.6% versus 40.0%, respectively, in those who had not., Conclusion: Alectinib demonstrated superior CNS activity and significantly delayed CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK+ NSCLC, irrespective of prior CNS disease or radiotherapy., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02075840.

Introduction: In ret proto-oncogene (RET)-rearranged lung cancers, data on the frequency of brain metastases and, in particular, the outcomes of multikinase inhibitor therapy in patients with intracranial disease are not well characterized., Methods: A global, multi-institutional registry (cohort A, n = 114) and a bi-institutional data set (cohort B, n = 71) of RET-rearranged lung cancer patients were analyzed. Patients were eligible if they had stage IV lung cancers harboring a RET rearrangement by local testing. The incidence of brain metastases and outcomes with multikinase inhibitor therapy were determined., Results: The frequency of brain metastases at the time of diagnosis of stage IV disease was 25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18%-32%) in all patients from both cohorts. The lifetime prevalence of brain metastasis in stage IV disease was 46% (95% CI: 34%-58%) in patients for whom longitudinal data was available. The cumulative incidence of brain metastases was significantly different (p = 0.0039) between RET-, ROS1-, and ALK receptor tyrosine kinase (ALK)-rearranged lung cancers, with RET intermediate between the other two groups. Although intracranial response data was not available in cohort A, the median progression-free survival of multikinase inhibitor therapy (cabozantinib, vandetanib, or sunitinib) in patients with brain metastases was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.3-2.9 months, n = 10). In cohort B, an intracranial response was observed in 2 of 11 patients (18%) treated with cabozantinib, vandetanib (± everolimus), ponatinib, or alectinib; the median overall progression-free survival (intracranial and extracranial) was 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.0-4.9 months)., Conclusions: Brain metastases occur frequently in RET-rearranged lung cancers, and outcomes with multikinase inhibitor therapy in general are suboptimal. Novel RET-directed targeted therapy strategies are needed., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In clinical trials of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with crizotinib, evaluation of the relationship between the percentage of ALK-positive cells by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-particularly near the cut-off defining positive status-and clinical outcomes have been limited by small sample sizes., Patients and Methods: Data were pooled from three large prospective trials (one single-arm and two randomized versus chemotherapy) of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC determined by Vysis ALK Break Apart FISH using a cut-off of ≥15% ALK-positive cells. Logistic regression and proportional hazards regression analyses were used to explore the association of percent ALK-positive cells with objective response and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively., Results: Of 11 081 screened patients, 1958 (18%) were ALK positive, 7512 (68%) were ALK negative, and 1540 (14%) were uninformative. Median percentage of ALK-positive cells was 58% in ALK-positive patients and 2% in ALK-negative patients. Of ALK-positive patients, 5% had 15%-19% ALK-positive cells; of ALK-negative patients, 2% had 10%-14% ALK-positive cells. Objective response rate for ALK-positive, crizotinib-treated patients with ≥20% ALK-positive cells was 56% (n = 700/1246), 55% (n = 725/1312) for those with ≥15% ALK-positive cells, and 38% for those with 15%-19% ALK-positive cells (n = 25/66). As a continuous variable, higher percentages of ALK-positive cells were estimated to be associated with larger differences in objective response and PFS between crizotinib and chemotherapy; however, tests for interaction between treatment and percentage of ALK-positive cells were not significant (objective response, P = 0.054; PFS, P = 0.17)., Conclusions: Patients with ALK-positive NSCLC benefit from treatment with crizotinib across the full range of percentage of ALK-positive cells, supporting the clinical utility of the 15% cut-off. The small number of patients with scores near the cut-off warrant additional study given the potential for misclassification of ALK status due to technical or biologic reasons.

Background: Afatinib is approved in the US, Europe, and several other regions for first-line treatment for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm + ) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Treatment-naive patients with advanced EGFRm + NSCLC were randomized to afatinib (40 mg/d) versus cisplatin/pemetrexed (LUX-Lung 3 [LL3]) or cisplatin/gemcitabine (LUX-Lung 6 [LL6]), or versus gefitinib (250 mg/d; LUX-Lung 7 [LL7]). We report subgroup analyses according to age, including 65 years or older versus younger than 65 years (preplanned; LL3/LL6) and additional cutoffs up to 75 years and older (exploratory; LL7). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated., Results: Among the 134 of 345 (39%) and 86 of 364 (24%) patients aged 65 years and older in LL3 and LL6, median PFS was improved with afatinib versus chemotherapy (LL3: hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39-1.03]; LL6: HR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.07-0.39]). Afatinib significantly improved OS versus chemotherapy in elderly patients with Del19 + NSCLC in LL3 (HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.19-0.80]). Among the 40 of 319 patients (13%) aged 75 years or older in LL7, median PFS (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.33-1.44]) favored afatinib, consistent with the overall population. Afatinib-associated AEs in older patients were consistent with the overall populations., Conclusions: Subgroup analyses of the LL3, LL6, and LL7 trials show that afatinib is an effective and tolerable treatment for patients with EGFRm + NSCLC, independent of age., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Traditionally, marked tumor shrinkage has been assumed to portend better outcome. We investigated whether depth of tumor response was associated with improved survival outcomes in advanced EGFR-mutant NCLC., Methods: Individual patient data from randomized trials (EURTAC, IPASS, ENSURE, LUX-Lung 3, and LUX-Lung 6) were used. The association of depth of response with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival was examined using landmark analyses. Depth of response based on radiologic assessments at 6 weeks and 12 weeks was calculated as the relative changes in the sum of the longest diameters of the target lesions from baseline., Results: Of 1081 evaluable patients at 6 weeks with no disease progression, 71.2% achieved Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors response. Using a landmark analysis, EGFR-TKI was more effective than chemotherapy (PFS hazard ratio = 0.36, p < .0001); and was associated with greater mean tumor shrinkage than chemotherapy (35.1% versus 18.5%, p < .0001). However, there was no significant difference in the relative PFS benefit between treatment groups across the entire spectrum of tumor shrinkage (p = .18 for test of interaction between treatment and continuously measured depth of response). Depth of response at 6 weeks was not associated with PFS when adjusted for treatment effect (hazard ratio = 0.96, p = .78). Similar results were obtained for 12-week landmark analysis and for OS outcome., Conclusions: The PFS advantage of EGFR-TKI over chemotherapy in advanced EGFR mutant NCLC is not explained by depth of response at 6 or 12 weeks. It should not be used as a surrogate of benefit in future trials or routine clinical decision making., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pemetrexed is a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are a standard first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations. Pemetrexed and EGFR TKIs have different mechanisms of action and minimally overlapping toxicity profiles; therefore, it is hypothesized that their combination might result in acceptable toxicity, provided that the synergistic antitumor activity observed in preclinical studies is achieved. This review summarizes clinical trials of pemetrexed in combination with an EGFR TKI for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous NSCLC in the first- and second-line settings, using intercalated, sequential, and concurrent treatment strategies. As would be expected, such strategies were most efficacious in patients with the activating EGFR mutations associated with response to an EGFR TKI. In the studies that compared a pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination with pemetrexed alone or the EGFR TKI alone, the pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combination was more efficacious than the single-agent regimens. The pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations were generally associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events than the single-agent regimens; however, such toxicities were clinically manageable. Future studies of pemetrexed-EGFR TKI combinations should focus on optimizing treatment strategies in patients with activating EGFR mutations., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Front-line epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR TKI) therapy is the standard of care for lung cancer patients with sensitising EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation). Several phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of gefitinib, erlotinib (first generation of TKIs) or afatinib (second generation) to chemotherapy in progression-free survival and response rates. Drug-related toxicities, such as diarrhoea, acneiform skin rash, mucositis, and paronychia, are frequently encountered in patients who receive EGFR TKIs. Other rare side-effects, such as hepatic impairment and interstitial lung disease, should be identified early and managed carefully. Patients with uncommon EGFR mutations, such as G719X, S768I, and L861Q, may require special selection of EGFR TKIs. The combination of erlotinib plus bevacizumab has been accepted in certain parts of the world as an alternative front-line treatment. This review article summarizes the studies leading to the establishment of EGFR TKIs in EGFR-mutant lung cancer patients. The side-effect profiles of the current EGFR TKIs in these large trials are listed, and the management of uncommon EGFR mutations is discussed. Finally, the potential role of combination front-line treatment is discussed.

Background: Chemotherapy remains a viable option for the management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) despite recent advances in molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy. We evaluated the efficacy of oral 5-fluorouracil-based S-1 as second- or third-line therapy compared with standard docetaxel therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC., Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with ≥1 platinum-based therapy were randomized 1 : 1 to docetaxel (60 mg/m2 in Japan, 75 mg/m2 at all other study sites; day 1 in a 3-week cycle) or S-1 (80-120 mg/day, depending on body surface area; days 1-28 in a 6-week cycle). The primary endpoint was overall survival. The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2., Results: A total of 1154 patients (577 in each arm) were enrolled, with balanced patient characteristics between the two arms. Median overall survival was 12.75 and 12.52 months in the S-1 and docetaxel arms, respectively [HR 0.945; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.833-1.073; P = 0.3818]. The upper limit of 95% CI of HR fell below 1.2, confirming non-inferiority of S-1 to docetaxel. Difference in progression-free survival between treatments was not significant (HR 1.033; 95% CI 0.913-1.168; P = 0.6080). Response rate was 8.3% and 9.9% in the S-1 and docetaxel arms, respectively. Significant improvement was observed in the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status over time points in the S-1 arm. The most common adverse drug reactions were decreased appetite (50.4%), nausea (36.4%), and diarrhea (35.9%) in the S-1 arm, and neutropenia (54.8%), leukocytopenia (43.9%), and alopecia (46.6%) in the docetaxel arm., Conclusion: S-1 is equally as efficacious as docetaxel and offers a treatment option for patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC., Clinical Trial Number: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center, JapicCTI-101155., (© The Author 2017. 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.)

Purpose: Crizotinib is a potent, orally administered tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report final results from PROFILE 1005, the largest clinical trial to date for an ALK inhibitor in ALK-positive NSCLC., Patients and Methods: PROFILE 1005 (NCT00932451) was a multicenter, single-arm phase 2 trial of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of crizotinib (250 mg twice daily; 3 week continuous treatment cycles) in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC after failure of ≥1 lines of systemic treatment for locally advanced/metastatic disease. Patients' tumour ALK status was initially determined by a central laboratory until a protocol amendment permitted enrolment of patients based on locally determined ALK status. Co-primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours V.1.1 and adverse events (AEs). Cancer-specific patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were also assessed using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and its lung cancer module QLQ-LC13., Results: 1069 patients were enrolled; 1066 received crizotinib. The as-treated population comprised 908 and 158 patients, in whom tumour positive ALK - status was determined centrally (± locally) or locally only, respectively. At baseline, a majority of patients were <65 years (84%), 66% were never smokers and 46% were Asian. Derived investigator-assessed ORR was 54% (95% CI 51 to 57) and 41% (95% CI 33 to 49) in the central-testing and local-testing subgroups, respectively. The most common treatment-related AEs in the overall population (any grade) were vision disorder (58%), nausea (51%), diarrhoea (47%) and vomiting (47%). PRO scores demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in lung cancer symptoms and global quality of life., Conclusion: The efficacy, safety and PRO profiles of crizotinib in this cohort of 1066 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC are consistent with previous reports., Trial Registration Number: Phase 2 trial (NCT00932451); Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: We have already uploaded ICMJE form of each authors when Ann Oncol submission

Background: In LUX-Lung 7, the irreversible ErbB family blocker, afatinib, significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and objective response rate (ORR) versus gefitinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we present primary analysis of mature overall survival (OS) data., Patients and Methods: LUX-Lung 7 assessed afatinib 40 mg/day versus gefitinib 250 mg/day in treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIb/IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion/L858R). Primary OS analysis was planned after ∼213 OS events and ≥32-month follow-up. OS was analysed by a Cox proportional hazards model, stratified by EGFR mutation type and baseline brain metastases., Results: Two-hundred and twenty-six OS events had occurred at the data cut-off (8 April 2016). After a median follow-up of 42.6 months, median OS (afatinib versus gefitinib) was 27.9 versus 24.5 months [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66‒1.12, P = 0.2580]. Prespecified subgroup analyses showed similar OS trends (afatinib versus gefitinib) in patients with exon 19 deletion (30.7 versus 26.4 months; HR, 0.83, 95% CI 0.58‒1.17, P = 0.2841) and L858R (25.0 versus 21.2 months; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.62‒1.36, P = 0.6585) mutations. Most patients (afatinib, 72.6%; gefitinib, 76.8%) had at least one subsequent systemic anti-cancer treatment following discontinuation of afatinib/gefitinib; 20 (13.7%) and 23 (15.2%) patients received a third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Updated PFS (independent review), TTF and ORR data were significantly improved with afatinib., Conclusion: In LUX-Lung 7, there was no significant difference in OS with afatinib versus gefitinib. Updated PFS (independent review), TTF and ORR data were significantly improved with afatinib., Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01466660., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Introduction: We performed a meta-analysis to assess the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors as second-line therapy in EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC., Methods: Randomized trials comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors against chemotherapy were identified. We retrieved the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for overall survival (OS) of the intention-to-treat population and EGFR mutation-defined subgroups. We used the fixed-effects inverse variance-weighted method to pool estimates of treatment efficacy. Statistical tests were two sided., Results: In the three included studies that compared immune checkpoint inhibitors (nivolumab [n = 292], pembrolizumab [n = 691], and atezolizumab [n =144]) against docetaxel (n = 776), immune checkpoint inhibitors significantly prolonged OS over that with docetaxel overall (n = 1903, HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61-0.77, p < 0.0001) and in the EGFR wild-type subgroup (n = 1362, HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.58-0.76, p < 0.0001) but not in the EGFR-mutant subgroup (n = 186, HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.70-1.55, p < 0.81; treatment-mutation interaction p = 0.03)., Conclusion: In EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC, immune checkpoint inhibitors do not improve OS over that with docetaxel. Mechanisms of acquired resistance to first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy should be elucidated to guide selection of second-line treatment for these patients., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Afatinib 40 mg/day is approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the case of drug-related grade ≥3 or selected prolonged grade 2 adverse events (AEs), the dose can be reduced by 10 mg decrements to a minimum of 20 mg. Here, we evaluate the influence of afatinib dose reduction on AEs, pharmacokinetics and progression-free survival (PFS) in the phase III LUX-Lung 3 and 6 (LL3/6) trials., Patients and Methods: Treatment-naïve patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC in LL3 (global) and LL6 (China, Thailand, South Korea) were randomized to afatinib or chemotherapy. All afatinib-treated patients (LL3, n = 229; LL6, n = 239) were included in the post hoc analyses. Incidence and severity of common AEs before and after afatinib dose reduction were assessed. Afatinib plasma concentrations were compared in patients who reduced to 30 mg versus those remaining at 40 mg. PFS was compared between patients who dose reduced within the first 6 months of treatment and those who did not., Results: Dose reductions occurred in 53.3% (122/229) and 28.0% (67/239) of patients in LL3 and LL6, respectively; most (86.1% and 82.1%) within the first 6 months of treatment. Dose reduction led to decreases in the incidence of drug-related AEs, and was more likely in patients with higher afatinib plasma concentrations. On day 43, patients who dose reduced to 30 mg (n = 59) had geometric mean afatinib plasma concentrations of 23.3 ng/ml, versus 22.8 ng/ml in patients who remained on 40 mg (n = 284). The median PFS was similar in patients who dose reduced during the first 6 months versus those who did not {LL3: 11.3 versus 11.0 months [hazard ratio (HR) 1.25]; LL6: 12.3 versus 11.0 months (HR 1.00)}., Conclusions: Tolerability-guided dose adjustment is an effective measure to reduce afatinib-related AEs without affecting therapeutic efficacy., Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT00949650 and NCT0112393., (© The Author 2016. 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: Exon 19 deletions and the exon 21 L858R mutation of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) predict activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, including erlotinib; however, the ability of less common EGFR mutations to predict efficacy of erlotinib is unclear., Methods: The efficacy of erlotinib in individual patients with rare EGFR mutations from the MERIT, SATURN, TITAN, TRUST, ATLAS, BeTa, and FASTACT-2 trials was analyzed and compared with data from the literature., Results: In the patients tested for biomarkers, the frequency of rare mutations identified here ranged from 1.7% (eight of 467) in the SATURN study to 7.4% (27 of 364) in ATLAS. Some rare mutations were associated with greater clinical benefit from EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy or improved prognosis independent of treatment, whereas others appeared to have a poorer prognosis. In particular, exon 18 G719 mutations, exon 19 K757R and E746G mutations, the exon 20 S768I mutation, and the exon 21 G836S mutation appeared to confer a good outcome with erlotinib treatment, whereas exon 18 S720I showed a particularly poor outcome. Owing to the small number of patients with each mutation, however, it is difficult to confirm whether these rare mutations do indeed confer sensitivity or resistance to erlotinib., Conclusions: Erlotinib can have different efficacy depending on the specific EGFR mutation. More research is needed to create a central database such as the My Cancer Genome database of rare mutations to definitively confirm whether these mutations are activating, resistant, or neutral., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Metastatic spread to the brain is common in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but these patients are generally excluded from prospective clinical trials. The studies, phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations (LUX-Lung 3) and a randomized, open-label, phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an EGFR activating mutation (LUX-Lung 6) investigated first-line afatinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation-positive patients with NSCLC and included patients with brain metastases; prespecified subgroup analyses are assessed in this article., Methods: For both LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6, prespecified subgroup analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and objective response rate were undertaken in patients with asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline (n = 35 and n = 46, respectively). Post hoc analyses of clinical outcomes was undertaken in the combined data set (n = 81)., Results: In both studies, there was a trend toward improved PFS with afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (LUX-Lung 3: 11.1 versus 5.4 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.54, p = 0.1378; LUX-Lung 6: 8.2 versus 4.7 months, HR = 0.47, p = 0.1060). The magnitude of PFS improvement with afatinib was similar to that observed in patients without brain metastases. In combined analysis, PFS was significantly improved with afatinib versus with chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (8.2 versus 5.4 months; HR, 0.50; p = 0.0297). Afatinib significantly improved the objective response rate versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases. Safety findings were consistent with previous reports., Conclusions: These findings lend support to the clinical activity of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive patients with NSCLC and asymptomatic brain metastases., (Copyright © 2015 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)