Search

IMPORTANCE Arginine deprivation using ADI-PEG20 (pegargiminase) combined with chemotherapy is untested in a randomized study among patients with cancer. ATOMIC-Meso (ADI-PEG20 Targeting of Malignancies Induces Cytotoxicity-Mesothelioma) is a pivotal trial comparing standard first-line chemotherapy plus pegargiminase or placebo in patients with nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma. OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of pegargiminase-based chemotherapy on survival in nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma, an arginine-auxotrophic tumor. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Thiswas a phase 2-3, double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted at 43 centers in 5 countries that included patients with chemotherapy-naive nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma from August 1, 2017, to August 15, 2021, with at least 12 months' follow-up. Final follow-up was on August 15, 2022. Data analysis was performed from March 2018 to June 2023. INTERVENTION Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly intramuscular pegargiminase (36.8mg/m2) or placebo. All patients received intravenous pemetrexed (500mg/m2) and platinum (75-mg/m2 cisplatin or carboplatin area under the curve 5) chemotherapy every 3 weeks up to 6 cycles. Pegargiminase or placebo was continued until progression, toxicity, or 24 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end pointwas overall survival, and secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety. Response rate by blinded independent central review was assessed in the phase 2 portion only. RESULTS Among 249 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [7.9] years; 43 female individuals [17.3%] and 206 male individuals [82.7%]), all were included in the analysis. The median overall survival was 9.3 months (95%CI, 7.9-11.8 months) with pegargiminase-chemotherapy as compared with 7.7 months (95%CI, 6.1-9.5 months) with placebo-chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.71; 95%CI, 0.55-0.93; P = .02). The median progression-free survival was 6.2 months (

Background: ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have revolutionized the treatment and largely improved the survival outcomes of patients with NSCLC harboring ALK rearrangements. Different ALK TKI compounds have demonstrated antitumor activity in these patients and are available in clinical practice. However, clinical expertise across countries varies according to local regulatory approval of different drugs, identifying multiple treatment scenarios to comply with international guidelines and clinical practice. Methods: A virtual webinar was held on July 2023 to discuss the state of the art and future perspectives in the treatment of ALK rearrangement in advanced NSCLC in Italy. The faculty hosting the webinar was composed of eight medical oncologists from different regions of Italy with clinical expertise in treating patients with lung cancer. Live-shared notes were used to produce a report to serve as the basis of a review manuscript on the topic. Results: Alectinib and brigatinib are the preferred front-line treatment options in Italy, pending approval of the front-line medicine lorlatinib, which would be considered among the choices. Due to a local regulatory limitation of second-line lorlatinib, which is not allowed after front-line brigatinib, alectinib is commonly the preferred front-line choice to follow a sequence of alectinib, followed by lorlatinib, followed by platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy. Age and performance status were not considered per se as clinical features influencing treatment choice. However, treatment compliance is deemed a relevant factor in decision making with regard to the number of pills to be administered. In general, given the availability of alternative choices, the spectrum of patients’ comorbidities and polypharmacotherapy interactions should be taken into account in treatment selection according to the toxicity profile of each compound. In addition, several issues were debated with regard to improving treatment outcomes, in

Background: The role of salvage surgery after tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer is largely unexplored. Patients: We aimed to describe the pathological features and surgical early-outcomes of Anaplastic Lymphome Kinase anaplastic lymphome kinase positive non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing surgery after first-line alectinib treatment. We retrospectively collected and analyzed multicentric data of 10 patients treated with alectinib for advanced-stage anaplastic lymphome kinase positive lung adenocarcinoma who underwent anatomical surgical resection from January 2020 to Decemeber 2021. All patients were treatment naive and received alectinib (600 mg twice daily). Surgery was always proposed after multidisciplinary discussion. The primary endpoints were pathological response and surgical feasibility (technical intraoperative complications, postoperative outcomes). Results: Alectinib was received for a mean of 212 days before surgery (42-415 days) and was generally interrupted about one week before surgery (range: 0-32 days) with no patient experienced grade 4 toxicity. All patients received an R0 resection with surgery consisting of lobectomy in 8 cases with bilobectomy and (left) pneumonectomy in 1 case each. Intra-operative difficulties were described in 7 cases (70%), mostly due to perivascular fibrosis or thickening of mediastinal lymph nodal tissues. Major and minor complications occurred in 0 and 3 cases (30%), respectively. A pathological complete response and major pathological response (defined as 0% and < 10% viable tumor cells, respectively) were observed in 50% and 90% of cases, respectively. Despite short follow-up, only one tumor recurrence was observed (in the only patient who did not resume alectinib after surgery). Interpretation: Despite some technical intraoperative difficulties, salvage surgery was safe and feasible after Alectinib for advanced lung adenocarcinoma.

Aim: Healthcare administrative databases represent a valuable source for real-life data analysis. The primary aim of this study is to compare effectiveness and cost profile in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring synchronous brain metastases (BMs) who received non-chemo first-line systemic therapy with or without advanced radiotherapy (aRT). Methods: Diagnostic ICD-9-CM codes were used for identifying all patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer between 2012 and 2019. Among these, patients who had started a first-line systemic treatment with either TKIs or pembrolizumab, alone or in combination with intensity-modulated or stereotactic RT, were selected. Clinical outcomes investigated included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment failure (TTF). The cost outcome was defined as the average per capita cumulative healthcare direct costs of the treatment, including all inpatient and outpatient costs. Results: The final cohort included 177 patients, of whom 58 were treated with systemic treatment plus aRT (STRT) and 119 with systemic treatment alone. The addition of aRT to systemic treatment was associated with a significantly better OS (p = 0.020) and PFS (p = 0.041) than systemic therapy alone. The ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) value indicated an average cost of €3792 for each month of survival after STRT treatment and confirmed clinical effectiveness but higher healthcare costs. Conclusions: This real-world study suggests that upfront aRT for NCLSC patients with synchronous BMs represents a valid treatment strategy, boosting the efficacy of novel and emerging drug classes with sustainable costs for the health service. Translational relevance: The present real-world study reports that the use of upfront advanced radiotherapyaRT and new-generation systemic agents, such as TKIs and pembrolizumab, may have higher oncological control and an improved cost-effectiveness profile than the use of new-gene

Background: To identify indicators of guideline-concordant care in lung cancer, to implement such indicators with cancer registry data linked to health databases, and to pilot them in a cohort of patients from the cancer registry of the Milan Province. Methods: Thirty-four indicators were selected by revision of main guidelines by cancer epidemiologists, and then evaluated by a multidisciplinary panel of clinicians involved in lung cancer care and working on the pathway of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in the Lombardy region, Italy. With a modified Delphi method, they assessed for each indicator the content validity as a quality measure of the care pathway, the degree of modifiability from the health professional, and the relevance to the health professional. Feasibility was assessed using the cancer registry and the routine health records of the Lombardy region. Feasible indicators were then calculated in the cohort of lung cancer patients diagnosed in 2007–2012 derived from the cancer registry of the Milan Province. Criterion validity was assessed reviewing clinical records of a random sample of 114 patients (threshold for acceptable discordance ≤20%). Finally, reliability was evaluated at the provider level. Results: Initially, 34 indicators were proposed for evaluation in the first Delphi round. Of the finally 22 selected indicators, 3 were not feasible because the required information was actually not available. The remaining 19 were calculated on the pilot cohort. After assessment of criterion validity (3 eliminated), 16 indicators were retained in the final set and evaluated for reliability. Conclusion: The developed and piloted set of indicators is now available to implement and monitor, over time, quality initiatives for lung cancer care in the studied health system.

Background: Results of several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus an anti-angiogenic drug in advanced EGFR-mutated non–small cell lung cancer were reported. Methods: We first report a systematic review and meta-analysis of all RCTs to estimate effectiveness and toxicity of this new therapeutic approach compared with first-generation EGFR-TKI monotherapy. Subsequently, we present a network meta-analysis comparing the combination of an EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug with 2 new treatment options: combination of an EGFR-TKI plus chemotherapy or new EGFR-TKIs of second or third generation as monotherapy. Results: Five RCTs were included in the first meta-analysis. The progression-free survival (PFS) was statistically significantly larger in patients treated with an EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy: the pooled PFS–hazard ratio (HR) was 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1⁄4 0.51 to 0.69). The pooled median-PFS was 17.8 months (95% CI 1⁄4 16.5 to 19.3 months) for the combination vs 11.7 months (95% CI 1⁄4 11.1 to 12.7 months) for EGFR-TKI as monotherapy. No statistically significant differences between the 2 treatment arms were observed in overall survival or objective response rate. The rate of grade equal or higher than 3 adverse events was statistically significantly higher in patients treated with EGFR-TKI plus an anti-angiogenic drug: the pooled-relative risk was 1.72 (95% CI 1⁄4 1.43 to 2.06). Ten RCTs were included in the network meta-analysis. All 3 experimental treatments were associated with a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with first-generation EGFR-TKIs. When compared to each other, none of the 3 experimental treatments were statistically significantly associated with larger PFS or lower rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events. Conclusion: Patients with EGFR-mutated non small-cell lung c

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended in patients with resected stages II to IIIA (and select IB) NSCLC; however, recurrence rates are high. In the phase 3 ADAURA study (NCT02511106), osimertinib was found to have a clinically meaningful improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with resected stages IB to IIIA EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) NSCLC. Here, we report prespecified and exploratory analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy use and outcomes from ADAURA. METHODS: Patients with resected stages IB to IIIA EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive osimertinib or placebo for 3 years. Adjuvant chemotherapy before randomization was not mandatory, per physician and patient choice. DFS in the overall population (IB-IIIA), with and without adjuvant chemotherapy, was a prespecified analysis. Exploratory analyses included the following: adjuvant chemotherapy use by patient age, disease stage, and geographic location; DFS by adjuvant chemotherapy use and disease stage. RESULTS: Overall, 410 of 682 patients (60%) received adjuvant chemotherapy (osimertinib, n = 203; placebo, n = 207) for a median duration of 4.0 cycles. Adjuvant chemotherapy use was more frequent in patients: aged less than 70 years (338 of 509; 66%) versus more than or equal to 70 years (72 of 173; 42%); with stages II to IIIA (352 of 466; 76%) versus stage IB (57 of 216; 26%); and enrolled in Asia (268 of 414; 65%) versus outside of Asia (142 of 268; 53%). A DFS benefit favoring osimertinib versus placebo was observed in patients with (DFS hazard ratio = 0.16, 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.26) and without adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.23, 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.40), regardless of disease stage. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support adjuvant osimertinib as an effective treatment for patients with stages IB to IIIA EGFRm NSCLC after resection, with or without previous adjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In the phase III ADAURA trial, adjuvant treatment with osimertinib versus placebo, with/without prior adjuvant chemotherapy, resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful disease-free survival benefit in completely resected stage IB-IIIA EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes from ADAURA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients randomized 1:1 received oral osimertinib 80 mg or placebo for 3 years or until recurrence/discontinuation. HRQoL (secondary endpoint) was measured using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks, then every 24 weeks until recurrence or treatment completion/discontinuation. Exploratory analyses of SF-36 score changes from baseline until week 96 and time to deterioration (TTD) were performed in the overall population (stage IB-IIIA; N = 682). Clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36 manual. RESULTS: Baseline physical/mental component summary (PCS/MCS) scores were comparable between osimertinib and placebo (range, 46-47) and maintained to Week 96, with no clinically meaningful differences between arms; difference in adjusted least squares (LS) mean [95% confidence intervals (CI), -1.18 (-2.02 to -0.34) and -1.34 (-2.40 to -0.28), for PCS and MCS, respectively. There were no differences between arms for TTD of PCS and MCS; HR, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.82-1.67) and HR, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.70-1.39), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL was maintained with adjuvant osimertinib in patients with stage IB-IIIA EGFRm NSCLC, who were disease-free after complete resection, with no clinically meaningful differences versus placebo, further supporting adjuvant osimertinib as a new treatment in this setting. See related commentary by Patil and Bunn, p. 2204.

Background: Hypofractionated proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) is gaining attention in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC). However, there is a large unmet need to define indications, prescription doses and potential adverse events of protons in this clinical scenario. Hence, the present work aims to provide a critical literature revision, and to investigate associations between fractionation schedules/ biological effective doses (BEDs), oncological outcomes and toxicities.Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis complied with the PRISMA recommendations. Inclusion criteria were: 1) curative-intent hypofractionated PBT for ES-NSCLC (>= 3 Gy(RBE)/fraction), 2) report of the clinical outcomes of interest, 3) availability of full-text written in English. The bibliographic search was performed on the NCBI Pubmed, Embase and Scopus in September 2021; no other limitations were applied. The BED was calculated for each included study (alpha/beta = 10 Gy); the median BED for all studies was used as a threshold for stratifying selected evidence into "high" and "low"-dose subgroups. Heterogeneity was tested using chi-square statistics; inconsistency was measured with the I2 index. Pooled estimate was obtained by fitting both the fixed-effect and the DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model.Results: Eight studies and 401 patients were available for the meta-analysis; median follow-up was 32.8 months. The median delivered BED was 105.6 Gy(RBE). A BED >= 105.6 Gy(RBE) consistently provided superior OS, CSS, DFS and LC rates (i.e.: 4-year OS: 0.56 [0.34-0.76] for BED < 105.6 Gy(RBE) and 0.78 [0.64-0.88] for BED >= 105.6 Gy(RBE)). The meta-analysis of proportions showed a comparable probability of developing acute grade >= 2 toxicity between the two groups, while the probability of any late grade >= 2 event was almost three-times greater for BED >= 105.6 Gy(RBE), with rib fractures being more common in the high dose group.Concl

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.