Search

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has significantly impacted health care systems. However, to date, the trend of hospitalizations in the oncology patient population has not been studied, and the frequency of nosocomial spread to patients with cancer is not well understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the impact of COVID‐19 on inpatient oncology census and determine the nosocomial rate of COVID‐19 in patients with cancer admitted at a large academic center. Materials and Methods Medical records of patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID‐19 and admitted were reviewed to evaluate the temporal trends in inpatient oncology census during pre–COVID‐19 (January 2019 to February 2020), COVID‐19 (March to May 2020), and post–COVID‐19 surge (June to August 2020) in the region. In addition, nosocomial infection rates of SARS‐CoV‐2 were reviewed. Results Overall, the daily inpatient census was steady in 2019 (median, 103; range, 92–118) and until February 2020 (median, 112; range, 102–114). However, there was a major decline from March to May 2020 (median, 68; range, 57–104), with 45.4% lower admissions during April 2020. As the COVID‐19 surge eased, the daily inpatient census over time returned to the pre–COVID‐19 baseline (median, 103; range, 99–111). One patient (1/231, 0.004%) tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 13 days after hospitalization, and it is unclear if it was nosocomial or community spread. Conclusion In this study, inpatient oncology admissions decreased substantially during the COVID‐19 surge but over time returned to the pre–COVID‐19 baseline. With aggressive infection control measures, the rates of nosocomial transmission were exceedingly low and should provide reassurance to those seeking medical care, including inpatient admissions when medically necessary. Implications for Practice The COVID‐19 pandemic has had a major impact on the health care system, and cancer patients are a vulnerable population. This study observes a significant decline in the daily inpatient oncology census from March to May 2020 compared with the same time frame in the previous year and examines the potential reasons for this decline. In addition, nosocomial rates of COVID‐19 were investigated, and rates were found to be very low. These findings suggest that aggressive infection control measures can mitigate the nosocomial infection risk among cancer patients and the inpatient setting is a safe environment, providing reassurance., To understand the overall impact of COVID‐19 on health care delivery in the oncology setting, this study evaluated the inpatient oncology census, in comparison to historical data and infusion volume, at an institution with a high volume of COVID‐19 admissions.

Introduction Capmatinib is approved for MET exon 14–altered NSCLC on the basis of activity in targeted therapy–naive patients. We conducted a phase 2 study to assess the efficacy of capmatinib in patients previously treated with a MET inhibitor. Methods Patients with advanced NSCLC harboring MET amplification or MET exon 14 skipping alterations received capmatinib 400 mg twice daily. The primary end point was the objective response rate. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, disease control rate (DCR), intracranial response rate, and overall survival. Circulating tumor DNA was analyzed to identify capmatinib resistance mechanisms. Results A total of 20 patients were enrolled between May 2016 and November 2019, including 15 patients with MET skipping alterations and five patients with MET amplification. All patients had received crizotinib; three had also received other MET-directed therapies. The median interval between crizotinib and capmatinib was 22 days (range: 4–374). Two patients (10%) achieved an objective response to capmatinib and 14 had stable disease, yielding a DCR of 80%. Among five patients who discontinued crizotinib for intolerance, the DCR was 83%, including two patients with the best tumor shrinkage of −25% and −28%. Intracranial DCR among four patients with measurable brain metastases was 100%, with no observed intracranial objective responses. Overall, the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 5.5 (95% confidence interval: 1.3–11.0) and 11.3 (95% confidence interval: 5.5–not reached) months, respectively. MET D1228 and Y1230 mutations and MAPK alterations were recurrently detected in postcrizotinib, precapmatinib plasma. New and persistent MET mutations and MAPK pathway alterations were detected in plasma at progression on capmatinib. Conclusions Capmatinib has modest activity in crizotinib-pretreated MET-altered NSCLC, potentially owing to overlapping resistance mechanisms.

Mutant-selective KRASG12C inhibitors, such as MRTX849 (adagrasib) and AMG 510 (sotorasib), have demonstrated efficacy in KRASG12C-mutant cancers, including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, mechanisms underlying clinical acquired resistance to KRASG12C inhibitors remain undetermined. To begin to define the mechanistic spectrum of acquired resistance, we describe a patient with KRASG12C NSCLC who developed polyclonal acquired resistance to MRTX849 with the emergence of 10 heterogeneous resistance alterations in serial cell-free DNA spanning four genes (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, MAP2K1), all of which converge to reactivate RAS–MAPK signaling. Notably, a novel KRASY96D mutation affecting the switch-II pocket, to which MRTX849 and other inactive-state inhibitors bind, was identified that interferes with key protein–drug interactions and confers resistance to these inhibitors in engineered and patient-derived KRASG12C cancer models. Interestingly, a novel, functionally distinct tricomplex KRASG12C active-state inhibitor RM-018 retained the ability to bind and inhibit KRASG12C/Y96D and could overcome resistance.Significance:In one of the first reports of clinical acquired resistance to KRASG12C inhibitors, our data suggest polyclonal RAS–MAPK reactivation as a central resistance mechanism. We also identify a novel KRAS switch-II pocket mutation that impairs binding and drives resistance to inactive-state inhibitors but is surmountable by a functionally distinct KRASG12C inhibitor.See related commentary by Pinnelli and Trusolino, p. 1874.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1861

Purpose: Current standard initial therapy for advanced, ROS proto-oncogene 1, receptor tyrosine kinase fusion (ROS1)-positive (ROS1+) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crizotinib or entrectinib. Lorlatinib, a next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase/ROS1 inhibitor, recently demonstrated efficacy in ROS1+ NSCLC, including in crizotinib-pretreated patients. However, mechanisms of lorlatinib resistance in ROS1+ disease remain poorly understood. Here, we assessed mechanisms of resistance to crizotinib and lorlatinib. Experimental Design: Biopsies from patients with ROS1+ NSCLC progressing on crizotinib or lorlatinib were profiled by genetic sequencing. Results: From 55 patients, 47 post-crizotinib and 32 post-lorlatinib biopsies were assessed. Among 42 post-crizotinib and 28 post-lorlatinib biopsies analyzed at distinct timepoints, ROS1 mutations were identified in 38% and 46%, respectively. ROS1 G2032R was the most commonly occurring mutation in approximately one third of cases. Additional ROS1 mutations included D2033N (2.4%) and S1986F (2.4%) post-crizotinib and L2086F (3.6%), G2032R/L2086F (3.6%), G2032R/S1986F/L2086F (3.6%), and S1986F/L2000V (3.6%) post-lorlatinib. Structural modeling predicted ROS1L2086F causes steric interference to lorlatinib, crizotinib, and entrectinib, while it may accommodate cabozantinib. In Ba/F3 models, ROS1L2086F, ROS1G2032R/L2086F, and ROS1S1986F/G2032R/L2086F were refractory to lorlatinib but sensitive to cabozantinib. A patient with disease progression on crizotinib and lorlatinib and ROS1 L2086F received cabozantinib for nearly 11 months with disease control. Among lorlatinib-resistant biopsies, we also identified MET amplification (4%), KRAS G12C (4%), KRAS amplification (4%), NRAS mutation (4%), and MAP2K1 mutation (4%). Conclusions: ROS1 mutations mediate resistance to crizotinib and lorlatinib in more than one third of cases, underscoring the importance of developing next-generation ROS1 inhibitors with potency against these mutations, including G2032R and L2086F. Continued efforts are needed to elucidate ROS1-independent resistance mechanisms.

International audience; Aberrant activation of RET is a critical driver of growth and proliferation in diverse solid tumours. Multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) showing anti-RET activities have been tested in RET-altered tumours with variable results. The low target specificity with consequent increase in side-effects and off-target toxicities resulting in dose reduction and drug discontinuation are some of the major issues with MKIs. To overcome these issues, new selective RET inhibitors such as pralsetinib (BLU-667) and selpercatinib (LOXO-292) have been developed in clinical trials, with selpercatinib recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The results of these trials showed marked and durable antitumour activity and manageable toxicity profiles in patients with RET-altered tumours. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group (TR and PM WG) launched a collaborative project to review the available methods for the detection of RET gene alterations, their potential applications and strategies for the implementation of a rational approach for the detection of RET fusion genes and mutations in human malignancies. We present here recommendations for the routine clinical detection of targetable RET rearrangements and mutations.

Emerging efficacy data have led to the emergency use authorization or approval of COVID-19 vaccines in several countries worldwide. Most trials of COVID-19 vaccines excluded patients with active malignancies, and thus data on the safety, tolerability and efficacy of the vaccines in patients with cancer are currently limited. Given the risk posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, decisions regarding the use of vaccines against COVID-19 in patients participating in trials of investigational anticancer therapies need to be addressed promptly. Patients should not have to choose between enrolling on oncology clinical trials and receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Clinical trial sponsors, investigators and treating physicians need operational guidance on COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer who are currently enrolled or might seek to enrol in clinical trials. Considering the high morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with cancer, the benefits of vaccination are likely to far outweigh the risks of vaccine-related adverse events. Herein, we provide operational COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients participating in oncology clinical trials. In our perspective, continued quality oncological care requires that patients with cancer, including those involved in trials, be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, which should not affect trial eligibility., Patients with cancer have a high risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines has provided new hope of mitigating the disease. Herein, the COVID19 and Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group calls for prioritization of patients with cancer, importantly including those participating in oncology clinical trials, for COVID-19 vaccination. The authors also provide operational COVID-19 vaccine guidance for patients participating in oncology clinical trials.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease, commonly defined by genetic alterations in oncogenic drivers. Targeted therapies have transformed the management of oncogene-driven lung cancers, with targeted agents now approved in the United States for 7 distinct molecular alterations. Nonetheless, acquired resistance remains an ongoing challenge, underscoring the need for alternative therapeutic approaches. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) axis have emerged as important therapies in the management of advanced NSCLC, but the role of these agents in patients with oncogenic driver mutations remains unclear. Here, we focus on epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant and anaplastic lymphoma kinase-rearranged NSCLC as paradigms to explore the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in oncogene-driven NSCLC. We provide an overview of the clinical data examining programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor monotherapy, PD-(L)1 inhibitors, and tyrosine kinase inhibitor combinations, as well as combinations of PD-(L)1 inhibitors and chemotherapy.

Histologic transformation from non-small cell to small cell lung cancer has been reported as a resistance mechanism to targeted therapy in EGFR-mutant and ALK fusion-positive lung cancers. Whether small cell transformation occurs in other oncogene-driven lung cancers remains unknown. Here we analyzed the genomic landscape of two pre-mortem and 11 post-mortem metastatic tumors collected from an advanced, ROS1 fusion-positive lung cancer patient, who had received sequential ROS1 inhibitors. Evidence of small cell transformation was observed in all metastatic sites at autopsy, with inactivation of RB1 and TP53, and loss of ROS1 fusion expression. Whole-exome sequencing revealed minimal mutational and copy number heterogeneity, suggestive of “hard” clonal sweep. Patient-derived models generated from autopsy retained features consistent with small cell lung cancer and demonstrated resistance to ROS1 inhibitors. This case supports small cell transformation as a recurring resistance mechanism, and underscores the importance of elucidating its biology to expand therapeutic opportunities.

Low rates of adult patient participation have been a persistent problem in cancer clinical trials and have continued to be a barrier to efficient drug development. The routine use of significant exclusion criteria has contributed to this problem by limiting participation in studies and creating significant clinical differences between the study cohorts and the real-world cancer patient populations. These routine exclusions also unnecessarily restrict opportunities for many patients to access potentially promising new therapies during clinical development. Multiple efforts are underway to broaden eligibility criteria, allowing more patients to enroll in studies and generating more robust data regarding the effect of novel therapies in the population at large. Focusing specifically on lung cancer as an example, a multistakeholder working group empaneled by the LUNGevity Foundation identified 14 restrictive and potentially outdated exclusion criteria that appear frequently in lung cancer clinical trials. As a part of the project, the group evaluated data from multiple recent lung cancer studies to ascertain the extent to which these 14 criteria appeared in study protocols and played a role in excluding patients (screen failures). The present report describes the working group's efforts to limit the use of these routine exclusions and presents clinical justifications for reducing the use of 14 criteria as routine exclusions in lung cancer studies, potentially expanding trial eligibility and improving the generalizability of the results from lung cancer trials.

Summary Background Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. Methods In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. Findings Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57–76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53–2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07–2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03–2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33–15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11–7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77–9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79–4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07–0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28–0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. Interpretation Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. Funding American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

Purpose: Most ALK-positive lung cancers will develop ALK-independent resistance after treatment with next-generation ALK inhibitors. MET amplification has been described in patients progressing on ALK inhibitors, but frequency of this event has not been comprehensively assessed. Experimental Design: We performed FISH and/or next-generation sequencing on 207 posttreatment tissue (n = 101) or plasma (n = 106) specimens from patients with ALK-positive lung cancer to detect MET genetic alterations. We evaluated ALK inhibitor sensitivity in cell lines with MET alterations and assessed antitumor activity of ALK/MET blockade in ALK-positive cell lines and 2 patients with MET-driven resistance. Results: MET amplification was detected in 15% of tumor biopsies from patients relapsing on next-generation ALK inhibitors, including 12% and 22% of biopsies from patients progressing on second-generation inhibitors or lorlatinib, respectively. Patients treated with a second-generation ALK inhibitor in the first-line setting were more likely to develop MET amplification than those who had received next-generation ALK inhibitors after crizotinib (P = 0.019). Two tumor specimens harbored an identical ST7-MET rearrangement, one of which had concurrent MET amplification. Expressing ST7-MET in the sensitive H3122 ALK-positive cell line induced resistance to ALK inhibitors that was reversed with dual ALK/MET inhibition. MET inhibition resensitized a patient-derived cell line harboring both ST7-MET and MET amplification to ALK inhibitors. Two patients with ALK-positive lung cancer and acquired MET alterations achieved rapid responses to ALK/MET combination therapy. Conclusions: Treatment with next-generation ALK inhibitors, particularly in the first-line setting, may lead to MET-driven resistance. Patients with acquired MET alterations may derive clinical benefit from therapies that target both ALK and MET.

Introduction Novel rearranged in transfection (RET)-specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) such as selpercatinib (LOXO-292) have shown unprecedented efficacy in tumors positive for RET fusions or mutations, notably RET fusion-positive NSCLC and RET-mutated medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). However, the mechanisms of resistance to these agents have not yet been described. Methods Analysis was performed of circulating tumor DNA and tissue in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and RET-mutation positive MTC who developed disease progression after an initial response to selpercatinib. Acquired resistance was modeled preclinically using a CCDC6-RET fusion-positive NSCLC patient-derived xenograft. The inhibitory activity of anti-RET multikinase inhibitors and selective RET TKIs was evaluated in enzyme and cell-based assays. Results After a dramatic initial response to selpercatinib in a patient with KIF5B-RET NSCLC, analysis of circulating tumor DNA revealed emergence of RET G810R, G810S, and G810C mutations in the RET solvent front before the emergence of clinical resistance. Postmortem biopsy studies reported intratumor and intertumor heterogeneity with distinct disease subclones containing G810S, G810R, and G810C mutations in multiple disease sites indicative of convergent evolution on the G810 residue resulting in a common mechanism of resistance. Acquired mutations in RET G810 were identified in tumor tissue from a second patient with CCDC6-RET fusion-positive NSCLC and in plasma from patients with additional RET fusion-positive NSCLC and RET-mutant MTC progressing on an ongoing phase 1 and 2 trial of selpercatinib. Preclinical studies reported the presence of RET G810R mutations in a CCDC6-RET patient-derived xenograft (from a patient with NSCLC) model of acquired resistance to selpercatinib. Structural modeling predicted that these mutations sterically hinder the binding of selpercatinib, and in vitro assays confirmed loss of activity for both anti-RET multikinase inhibitors and selective RET TKIs. Conclusions RET G810 solvent front mutations represent the first described recurrent mechanism of resistance to selective RET inhibition with selpercatinib. Development of potent inhibitor of these mutations and maintaining activity against RET gatekeeper mutations could be an effective strategy to target resistance to selective RET inhibitors.

Purpose: Acquired resistance to next-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is often driven by secondary ALK mutations. Here, we investigated utility of plasma genotyping for identifying ALK resistance mutations at relapse on next-generation ALK TKIs. Experimental Design: We analyzed 106 plasma specimens from 84 patients with advanced ALK-positive lung cancer treated with second- and third-generation ALK TKIs using a commercially available next-generation sequencing (NGS) platform (Guardant360). Tumor biopsies from TKI-resistant lesions underwent targeted NGS to identify ALK mutations. Results: By genotyping plasma, we detected an ALK mutation in 46 (66%) of 70 patients relapsing on a second-generation ALK TKI. When post-alectinib plasma and tumor specimens were compared, there was no difference in frequency of ALK mutations (67% vs. 63%), but plasma specimens were more likely to harbor ≥2 ALK mutations (24% vs. 2%, P = 0.004). Among 29 patients relapsing on lorlatinib, plasma genotyping detected an ALK mutation in 22 (76%), including 14 (48%) with ≥2 ALK mutations. The most frequent combinations of ALK mutations were G1202R/L1196M and D1203N/1171N. Detection of ≥2 ALK mutations was significantly more common in patients relapsing on lorlatinib compared with second-generation ALK TKIs (48% vs. 23%, P = 0.017). Among 15 patients who received lorlatinib after a second-generation TKI, serial plasma analysis demonstrated that eight (53%) acquired ≥1 new ALK mutations on lorlatinib. Conclusions: ALK resistance mutations increase with each successive generation of ALK TKI and may be underestimated by tumor genotyping. Sequential treatment with increasingly potent ALK TKIs may promote acquisition of ALK resistance mutations leading to treatment-refractory compound ALK mutations.

Background The use of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has revolutionized cancer treatment. However, these medications are associated with significant and potentially debilitating immune-related adverse events (irAEs). While certain toxicities have been well studied, rheumatic complications have been less widely recognized and characterized. Methods We report our experience of patients who were evaluated by rheumatology after the development of a suspected rheumatic irAE following ICI treatment. Cases of rheumatic irAEs were included if active rheumatic signs or symptoms developed during or after ICI treatment and were confirmed by a treating rheumatologist. Results Twenty-nine patients were evaluated by rheumatology for suspected rheumatic irAEs. Eighteen patients had confirmed toxicity including inflammatory arthritis (n = 12) and PMR (n = 6). Twelve patients had de novo toxicity and six had a flare of a pre-existing rheumatic condition. The onset of de novo toxicity occurred late into treatment (median 38 weeks), while patients with pre-existing rheumatic disease flared soon after initiation of ICI treatment (median 4.6 weeks). Management often required systemic or intra-articular steroids, with initiation of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy in those unable to wean off steroids. Conclusion De novo rheumatic irAEs are generally delayed in onset after ICI initiation, while flares of pre-existing rheumatic conditions occur shortly after ICI initiation. Effective management often requires systemic corticosteroids as well as DMARDs in a subset of patients. Future prospective studies are needed to accurately describe the incidence and spectrum of rheumatic irAEs and to identify the most effective management strategies.

Since the first generation of small molecules was included in the armamentarium of treatment of solid tumors (imatinib, erlotinib, etc.), there has been an expansion of anticancer small molecules, mostly kinase inhibitors, in development. Some of these drugs may not be a real breakthrough but may be similar in pharmacologic properties and marginal benefit over previously existing agents for the same indication (i.e., me-too drugs). Other drugs, however, have been specifically designed to solve an unmet medical need. Overcoming the problems of the blood–brain barrier and brain metastasis, emerging resistance mutations (such as gatekeeper mutations), or increasing selectivity/potency can be addressed with modern drug design. In this article, we discuss the advancements in the field of drug discovery, drug development, and clinical development that have enabled solving some of these issues. The evolution of the different generations of EGFR and anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors exemplifies recent advancements in pharmacology that are driving the field of anticancer small molecules as a whole.

Introduction Circulating tumor DNA analysis is an emerging genotyping strategy that can identify tumor-specific genetic alterations in plasma including mutations and rearrangements. Detection of ROS1 fusions in plasma requires genotyping approaches that cover multiple breakpoints and target a variety of fusion partners. Compared to other molecular subsets of NSCLC, experience with detecting ROS1 genetic alterations in plasma is limited. Methods To describe the spectrum of ROS1 fusions in NSCLC and determine sensitivity for detecting ROS1 fusions in plasma, we queried the Guardant Health plasma dataset and an institutional tissue database and compared plasma findings to tissue results. In addition, we used the Guardant360 NGS assay to detect potential genetic mediators of resistance in plasma from patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC who were relapsing on crizotinib. Results We detected seven distinct fusion partners in plasma, most of which (n = 6 of 7) were also represented in the tissue dataset. Fusions pairing CD74 with ROS1 predominated in both cohorts (plasma: n = 35 of 56, 63%; tissue: n = 26 of 52, 50%). There was 100% concordance between the specific tissue- and plasma-detected ROS1 fusion for seven patients genotyped with both methods. Sensitivity for detecting ROS1 fusions in plasma at relapse on ROS1-directed therapy was 50%. Six (33%) of 18 post-crizotinib plasma specimens harbored ROS1 kinase domain mutations, five of which were ROS1 G2032R. Two (11%) post-crizotinib plasma specimens had genetic alterations (n = 1 each BRAF V600E and PIK3CA E545K) potentially associated with ROS1-independent signaling. Conclusions Plasma genotyping captures the spectrum of ROS1 fusions observed in tissue. Plasma genotyping is a promising approach to detecting mutations that drive resistance to ROS1-directed therapies.

Background Central nervous system (CNS) metastases represent a significant source of morbidity and mortality for patients with ALK tyrosine kinase gene (ALK)-positive NSCLC. Alectinib has demonstrated robust CNS activity in both crizotinib-naive and crizotinib-resistant settings. However, the CNS efficacy of alectinib has not been established in patients with untreated symptomatic, large CNS metastases. Methods In this retrospective study, patients were eligible if they had advanced ALK-positive NSCLC with large (defined as ≥1 cm) or symptomatic CNS metastases and received alectinib. Medical records and radiographic imaging were reviewed to determine treatment outcomes. CNS efficacy was assessed per the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Results Of the 19 patients, 15 (79%) had measurable CNS disease at baseline and were evaluable for response. The CNS objective response rate in these patients was 73.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 44.9%-92.2%), the CNS disease control rate was 100.0% (95% CI: 78.2%-100.0%), and the median CNS duration of response was 19.3 months (95% CI: 14.3 months-not evaluable). In 18 evaluable patients with measurable and/or nonmeasurable baseline CNS disease, the CNS objective response rate was 72.2% (95% CI: 46.5%-90.3%), the CNS disease control rate was 100.0% (95% CI: 81.5%-100.0%), and the median CNS duration of response was 17.1 months (95% CI: 14.3 months-not evaluable). All eight patients with symptoms attributable to CNS metastases had clinical improvement upon starting alectinib therapy. Six patients (32%) eventually required salvage brain radiotherapy. Conclusions Alectinib demonstrated meaningful CNS efficacy in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC with untreated symptomatic or large brain metastases.

PURPOSE CheckMate 568 is an open-label phase II trial that evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab as first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We assessed the association of efficacy with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB). PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred eighty-eight patients with previously untreated, recurrent stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) in patients with 1% or more and less than 1% tumor PD-L1 expression. Efficacy on the basis of TMB (FoundationOne CDx assay) was a secondary end point. RESULTS Of treated patients with tumor available for testing, 252 patients (88%) of 288 were evaluable for PD-L1 expression and 98 patients (82%) of 120 for TMB. ORR was 30% overall and 41% and 15% in patients with 1% or greater and less than 1% tumor PD-L1 expression, respectively. ORR increased with higher TMB, plateauing at 10 or more mutations/megabase (mut/Mb). Regardless of PD-L1 expression, ORRs were higher in patients with TMB of 10 or more mut/Mb (n = 48: PD-L1, ≥ 1%, 48%; PD-L1, < 1%, 47%) versus TMB of fewer than 10 mut/Mb (n = 50: PD-L1, ≥ 1%, 18%; PD-L1, < 1%, 5%), and progression-free survival was longer in patients with TMB of 10 or more mut/Mb versus TMB of fewer than 10 mut/Mb (median, 7.1 v 2.6 months). Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 29% of patients. CONCLUSION Nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab was effective and tolerable as a first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic NSCLC. TMB of 10 or more mut/Mb was associated with improved response and prolonged progression-free survival in both tumor PD-L1 expression 1% or greater and less than 1% subgroups and was thus identified as a potentially relevant cutoff in the assessment of TMB as a biomarker for first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab.

We present a cohort of 41 patients with osimertinib resistance biopsies, including 2 with an acquired CCDC6–RET fusion. Although RET fusions have been identified in resistant EGFR-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), their role in acquired resistance to EGFR inhibitors is not well described. To assess the biological implications of RET fusions in an EGFR-mutant cancer, we expressed CCDC6–RET in PC9 (EGFR del19) and MGH134 (EGFR L858R/T790M) cells and found that CCDC6–RET was sufficient to confer resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The selective RET inhibitors BLU-667 and cabozantinib resensitized CCDC6–RET-expressing cells to EGFR inhibition. Finally, we treated 2 patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC and RET-mediated resistance with osimertinib and BLU-667. The combination was well tolerated and led to rapid radiographic response in both patients. This study provides proof of concept that RET fusions can mediate acquired resistance to EGFR TKIs and that combined EGFR and RET inhibition with osimertinib/BLU-667 may be a well-tolerated and effective treatment strategy for such patients. Significance: The role of RET fusions in resistant EGFR-mutant cancers is unknown. We report that RET fusions mediate resistance to EGFR inhibitors and demonstrate that this bypass track can be effectively targeted with a selective RET inhibitor (BLU-667) in the clinic. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1494

BH3 mimetic drugs, which inhibit prosurvival BCL2 family proteins, have limited single-agent activity in solid tumor models. The potential of BH3 mimetics for these cancers may depend on their ability to potentiate the apoptotic response to chemotherapy and targeted therapies. Using a novel class of potent and selective MCL1 inhibitors, we demonstrate that concurrent MEK + MCL1 inhibition induces apoptosis and tumor regression in KRAS-mutant non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) models, which respond poorly to MEK inhibition alone. Susceptibility to BH3 mimetics that target either MCL1 or BCL-xL was determined by the differential binding of proapoptotic BCL2 proteins to MCL1 or BCL-xL, respectively. The efficacy of dual MEK + MCL1 blockade was augmented by prior transient exposure to BCL-xL inhibitors, which promotes the binding of proapoptotic BCL2 proteins to MCL1. This suggests a novel strategy for integrating BH3 mimetics that target different BCL2 family proteins for KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Significance: Defining the molecular basis for MCL1 versus BCL-xL dependency will be essential for effective prioritization of BH3 mimetic combination therapies in the clinic. We discover a novel strategy for integrating BCL-xL and MCL1 inhibitors to drive and subsequently exploit apoptotic dependencies of KRAS-mutant NSCLCs treated with MEK inhibitors. See related commentary by Leber et al., p. 1511. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1494

Importance Severe acute esophagitis occurs in up to 20% of patients with locally advanced lung cancer treated with chemoradiation therapy to at least 60 Gy once daily and represents a dose-limiting toxic event associated with poor outcomes. Objective To assess whether formalized sparing of the contralateral esophagus (CE) is associated with reduced risk of severe acute esophagitis. Design, setting, and participants This single-center phase 1 nonrandomized clinical trial assessing an empirical CE-sparing technique enrolled patients from July 2015 to January 2019. In total, 27 patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (with or without solitary brain metastasis) or limited-stage small cell lung carcinoma with gross tumor within 1 cm of the esophagus were eligible. Interventions Intensity-modulated radiation therapy to 70 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction concurrent with standard chemotherapy with or without adjuvant durvalumab. The esophageal wall contralateral to gross tumor was contoured as an avoidance structure to guide a steep dose falloff gradient. Target coverage was prioritized over CE sparing, and 99% of internal and planning target volumes had to be covered by 70 Gy and at least 63 Gy, respectively. Main outcomes and measures The primary end point was the rate of at least grade 3 acute esophagitis as assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Results Of 27 patients enrolled, 25 completed chemoradiation therapy. Nineteen patients had non-small cell lung carcinoma, and 6 had small cell lung carcinoma. The median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range, 51-81 years), and 15 patients (60%) were men. Thirteen patients (52%) had stage IIIA cancer, 10 (40%) had stage IIIB cancer, and 2 (8%) had stage IV cancer. The median CE maximum dose was 66 Gy (range, 44-71 Gy); the median volume of CE receiving at least 55 Gy was 1.4 cm3 (range, 0-5.3 cm3), and the median volume of CE receiving at least 45 Gy was 2.7 cm3 (range, 0-9.2 cm3). The median combined percentage of lung receiving at least 20 Gy was 25% (range, 11%-37%). The median follow-up was 33.3 months (range, 11.1-52.2 months). Among the 20 patients who had treatment breaks of 0 to 3 days and were thus evaluable for the primary end point, the rate of at least grade 3 esophagitis was 0%. Other toxic events observed among all 25 patients included 7 (28%) with grade 2 esophagitis, 3 (12%) with at least grade 2 pneumonitis (including 1 with grade 5), and 2 (8%) with at least grade 3 cardiac toxic event (including 1 with grade 5). There was no isolated local tumor failure. The 2-year progression-free survival rate was 57% (95% CI, 33%-75%), and the 2-year overall survival rate was 67% (95% CI, 45%-82%). Conclusions and relevance This phase 1 nonrandomized clinical trial found that the CE-sparing technique was associated with reduced risk of esophagitis among patients treated uniformly with chemoradiation therapy (to 70 Gy), with no grade 3 or higher esophagitis despite tumor within 1 cm of the esophagus. This technique may be translated into clinical practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02394548.

Two RET inhibitors, selpercatinib and pralsetinib, recently received approval for the treatment of advanced RET fusion-positive lung cancer. Acquired resistance to these inhibitors will be a major challenge. We have shown that resistance can emerge due to recurrent RET kinase domain mutations and, in most cases, due to RET-independent mechanisms.

Summary Background Oncogenic alterations in RET represent important therapeutic targets in thyroid cancer. We aimed to assess the safety and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET-altered thyroid cancers. Methods ARROW, a phase 1/2, open-label study done in 13 countries across 71 sites in community and hospital settings, enrolled patients 18 years or older with RET-altered locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET-mutant medullary thyroid and RET fusion-positive thyroid cancers, and an Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 (later limited to 0–1 in a protocol amendment). Phase 2 primary endpoints assessed for patients who received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision, were overall response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1; masked independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed for patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer who had received previous cabozantinib or vandetanib, or both, or were ineligible for standard therapy and patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer; safety was assessed for all patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer. This ongoing study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03037385 , and enrolment of patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. Findings Between Mar 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020, 122 patients with RET-mutant medullary and 20 with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancers were enrolled. Among patients with baseline measurable disease who received pralsetinib by July 11, 2019 (enrolment cutoff for efficacy analysis), overall response rates were 15 (71%) of 21 (95% CI 48–89) in patients with treatment-naive RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer and 33 (60%) of 55 (95% CI 46–73) in patients who had previously received cabozantinib or vandetanib, or both, and eight (89%) of nine (95% CI 52–100) in patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer (all responses confirmed for each group). Common (≥10%) grade 3 and above treatment-related adverse events among patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer enrolled by May 22, 2020, were hypertension (24 patients [17%] of 142), neutropenia (19 [13%]), lymphopenia (17 [12%]), and anaemia (14 [10%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 21 patients (15%), the most frequent (≥2%) of which was pneumonitis (five patients [4%]). Five patients [4%] discontinued owing to treatment-related events. One (1%) patient died owing to a treatment-related adverse event. Interpretation Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, potent once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer. Funding Blueprint Medicines.

Summary Background Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1–2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. Methods ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 (later limited to 0–1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. Findings Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50–71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50–86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population. Interpretation Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. Funding Blueprint Medicines.

RET (rearranged during transfection) gene encodes a receptor tyrosine kinase essential for many physiologic functions, but RET aberrations are involved in many pathologies. While RET loss-of-function mutations are associated with congenital disorders like Hirschsprung disease and CAKUT, RET gain-of-function mutations and rearrangements are critical drivers of tumor growth and proliferation in many different cancers. RET-altered (RET+) tumors have been hitherto targeted with multikinase inhibitors (MKI) having anti-RET activities, but they inhibit other kinase targets more potently and show limited clinical activities. The lack of target specificity and consequently increased side effects, responsible for dose reduction and drug discontinuation, are critical limitations of MKIs in the clinics. New selective RET inhibitors, selpercatinib and pralsetinib, are showing promising activities, improved response rates, and more favorable toxicity profiles in early clinical trials. This review critically discusses the oncogenic activation of RET and its role in different kinds of tumors, clinical features of RET+ tumors, clinically actionable genetic RET alterations and their diagnosis, and the available data and results of nonselective and selective targeting of RET.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.

Background T-cell targeting of mutation-derived epitopes (neoantigens) has shown to drive anti-tumor responses. Immunizing patients against such neoantigens in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) may elicit greater anti-tumor responses than CPI alone. Mutations are rarely shared between patients, thus requiring a personalized approach to vaccine design. mRNA-4157 is a lipid encapsulated mRNA based personalized cancer vaccine encoding neoantigens selected using a proprietary algorithm to induce neoantigen specific T cells and associated anti-tumor responses. This report includes updates from the mRNA-4157 Phase1(P1) study. The initial data was presented at ASCO2019.1 Methods This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of mRNA-4157 as monotherapy in patients with resected solid tumors (Part A) and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors (Parts B). The selected solid tumors in Part A-B includes melanoma, bladder carcinoma, HPV-negative (HPV-neg) HNSCC, NSCLC, SCLC, MSI-High (MSI-h), or TMB-High cancers. Expansion cohorts includes patients with CPI-naive MSS-CRC and HPV-neg HNSCC (Part C) and with resected melanoma (Part D). Patients receive up to 9 cycles (Q3W) of mRNA-4157 by intramuscular injection at up to 1 mg alone (Part A) or in combination with pembrolizumab (200 mg IV Q3W, Parts B-D). Pembrolizumab is administered for two cycles before the first dose of mRNA-4157 and may continue after 9 cycles of combination. Endpoints include safety, tolerability, efficacy and biomarker assessments. Results 79 patients received mRNA-4157; 16 as monotherapy and 63 in combination with pembrolizumab. Only low grade and reversible treatment related AEs were reported. 14/16 Part A patients (3 melanoma, 11 NSCLC, 2 MSI-h CRC) remained disease free on study. 28 patients in Parts B (6 bladder, 2 HNSCC, 3 melanoma, 10 NSCLC, 2 SCLC, 4 MSI-h tumor, 1 TMB-h tumor), 27 patients in Part C (10 HNSCC and 17 MSS-CRC), and 8 patients with resected melanoma (Part D) received combination. 3 CR (1 HNSCC, 1 MSI-h CRC and 1 MSI-h prostate), and 8 PR (1 bladder, 4 HNSCC, 2 SCLC and 1 MSI-h endometrial) were observed with combination. Of 10 CPI-naive HPV-neg HNSCC patients, the response rate was 50% (1CR, 4PR, 4SD) mPFS 9.8months, which compared favorably to published rates of ~14.6% mPFS 2.0months for pembrolizumab monotherapy.2 3 Biomarker assessments including immune gene expression profiling will be presented. Conclusions mRNA-4157 has an acceptable safety profile along with observed clinical responses in combination with pembrolizumab. Preliminary efficacy analysis from CPI-naive relapsed/refractory HPV-neg HNSCC cohort suggests activity of this combination. Study is ongoing. Trial Registration NCT03313778 Ethics Approval The study was approved by each participating sites’ local IRB. References Burris H, et al. A phase I multicenter study to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of mRNA-4157 alone in patients with resected solid tumors and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable solid tumors. Journal of Clinical Oncology20 May 2019;37(15):2523-2523. Seiwert T, et al. Safety and clinical activity of pembrolizumab for treatment of recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (KEYNOTE-012): an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b trial. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:956–65. Cohen E, et al. Pembrolizumab versus methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab for recurrent or metastatic head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-040): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet 2019;393:10167:156-16.

BACKGROUND: Rearranged during transfection (RET) gene fusions are a validated target in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). RET-selective inhibitors selpercatinib (LOXO-292) and pralsetinib (BLU-667) recently demonstrated favorable antitumor activity and safety profiles in advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and both have received approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for this indication. Insights into mechanisms of resistance to selective RET inhibitors remain limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was performed at five institutions. Tissue and/or cell-free DNA was obtained from patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC after treatment with selpercatinib or pralsetinib and assessed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) or MET fluorescence in situ hybridization. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 23 post-treatment tissue and/or plasma biopsies from 18 RET fusion-positive patients who received a RET-selective inhibitor (selpercatinib, n=10; pralsetinib, n=7; pralsetinib followed by selpercatinib, n=1 with biopsy after each inhibitor). Three cases had paired tissue and plasma samples, of which one also had two serial resistant tissue specimens. The median progression-free survival on RET inhibitors was 6.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.6–10.8 months]. Acquired RET mutations were identified in two cases (10%), both affecting the RET G810 residue in the kinase solvent front. Three resistant cases (15%) harbored acquired MET amplification without concurrent RET resistance mutations, and one specimen had acquired KRAS amplification. No other canonical driver alterations were identified by NGS. Among 16 resistant tumor specimens, none had evidence of squamous or small cell histologic transformation. CONCLUSIONS: RET solvent front mutations are a recurrent mechanism of RET inhibitor resistance, although they occurred at a relatively low frequency. The majority of resistance to selective RET inhibition may be driven by RET-independent resistance such as acquired MET or KRAS amplification. Next-generation RET inhibitors with potency against RET resistance mutations and combination strategies are needed to effectively overcome resistance in these patients.

Real-world evidence (RWE), conclusions derived from analysis of patients not treated in clinical trials, is increasingly recognized as an opportunity for discovery, to reduce disparities, and to contribute to regulatory approval. Maximal value of RWE may be facilitated through machine-learning techniques to integrate and interrogate large and otherwise underutilized datasets. In cancer research, an ongoing challenge for RWE is the lack of reliable, reproducible, scalable assessment of treatment-specific outcomes. We hypothesized a deep-learning model could be trained to use radiology text reports to estimate gold-standard RECIST-defined outcomes. Using text reports from patients with non–small cell lung cancer treated with PD-1 blockade in a training cohort and two test cohorts, we developed a deep-learning model to accurately estimate best overall response and progression-free survival. Our model may be a tool to determine outcomes at scale, enabling analyses of large clinical databases. Significance: We developed and validated a deep-learning model trained on radiology text reports to estimate gold-standard objective response categories used in clinical trial assessments. This tool may facilitate analysis of large real-world oncology datasets using objective outcome metrics determined more reliably and at greater scale than currently possible. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1

BACKGROUND: RET fusions are oncogenic drivers in 1 to 2% of non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). In patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC, the efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibition are unknown. METHODS: We enrolled patients with advanced RET fusion–positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated separately in a phase 1–2 trial of selpercatinib. The primary end point was an objective response (a complete or partial response) as determined by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: In the first 105 consecutively enrolled patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC who had previously received at least platinum-based chemotherapy, the percentage with an objective response was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). The median duration of response was 17.5 months (95% CI, 12.0 to could not be evaluated), and 63% of the responses were ongoing at a median follow-up of 12.1 months. Among 39 previously untreated patients, the percentage with an objective response was 85% (95% CI, 70 to 94), and 90% of the responses were ongoing at 6 months. Among 11 patients with measurable central nervous system metastasis at enrollment, the percentage with an objective intracranial response was 91% (95% CI, 59 to 100). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (in 14% of the patients), an increased alanine aminotransferase level (in 12%), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 10%), hyponatremia (in 6%), and lymphopenia (in 6%). A total of 12 of 531 patients (2%) discontinued selpercatinib because of a drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib had durable efficacy, including intracranial activity, with mainly low-grade toxic effects in patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated. (Funded by Loxo Oncology and others; LIBRETTO-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03157128.)

Purpose The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence and outcomes of extrapulmonary malignancies identified on lung cancer screening (LCS) and to determine the cost associated with the investigation of these lesions. Methods This retrospective study included 7,414 low-dose CT studies performed between June 2014 and December 2019 on 4,160 patients as part of an established LCS program. Patients with indeterminate extrapulmonary lesions were identified, and the diagnostic workup, management, and outcomes of the lesions were determined. Costs related to diagnostic evaluation were estimated using 2020 total facility relative value units and the 2020 Medicare conversion factor. Out-of-pocket costs were extracted from billing records. Results There were 20 extrapulmonary malignancies among 241 reported lesions in 225 patients (mean age, 66.1 ± 6.4 years; 109 men, 116 women). The prevalence of extrapulmonary malignancy was 20 of 4,160 (0.48%). Early-stage cancers were detected in 13 of 20 (65%). No cancer-specific mortality was observed. The predictive value for malignancy varied by organ (P = .03) and was highest in the chest wall and axilla (36.4%), followed by bone (25%). The average cost on the basis of Medicare reimbursement for diagnosis of an extrapulmonary malignancy on LCS was $1,316.03 ($6.33 per participant and $109.21 per indeterminate incidental lesion). Most patients (203 of 225 [90.2%]) did not have out-of-pocket costs related to diagnostic workup. In those who did, the median cost was $160.60 (range, $75-$606.76). Conclusions Low-dose CT for LCS detects extrapulmonary malignancy with high predictive value for certain locations. There is cost associated in the workup related to these incidental lesions, but most malignancies are detected at early stages and have good outcomes.

BackgroundSpartalizumab is a humanized IgG4κ monoclonal antibody that binds programmed death-1 (PD-1) and blocks its interaction with PD-L1 and PD-L2. This phase 1/2 study was designed to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of spartalizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors.MethodsIn the phase 1 part of the study, 58 patients received spartalizumab, intravenously, at doses of 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg, administered every 2 weeks (Q2W), or 3 or 5 mg/kg every 4 weeks (Q4W).ResultsPatients had a wide range of tumor types, most commonly sarcoma (28%) and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (10%); other tumor types were reported in ≤3 patients each. Most patients (93%) had received prior antineoplastic therapy (median three prior lines) and two-thirds of the population had tumor biopsies negative for PD-L1 expression at baseline. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The recommended phase 2 doses were selected as 400 mg Q4W or 300 mg Q3W. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and adverse events included those typical of other PD-1 antibodies. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were fatigue (22%), diarrhea (17%), pruritus (14%), hypothyroidism (10%), and nausea (10%). Partial responses occurred in two patients (response rate 3.4%); one with atypical carcinoid tumor of the lung and one with anal cancer. Paired tumor biopsies from patients taken at baseline and on treatment suggested an on-treatment increase in CD8+ lymphocyte infiltration in patients with clinical benefit.ConclusionsSpartalizumab was well tolerated at all doses tested in patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors. On-treatment immune activation was seen in tumor biopsies; however, limited clinical activity was reported in this heavily pretreated, heterogeneous population. The phase 2 part of this study is ongoing in select tumor types.Trial registration numberNCT02404441.

Rearranged during transfection proto-oncogene (RET) fusions represent a potentially targetable oncogenic driver in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Imaging features and metastatic patterns of advanced RET fusion-positive (RET+) NSCLC are not well established. Our goal was to compare the imaging features and patterns of metastases in RET+, ALK+ and ROS1+ NSCLC. Patients with RET+, ALK+, or ROS1+ NSCLC seen at our institution between January 2014 and December 2018 with available pre-treatment imaging were identified. The clinicopathologic features, imaging characteristics, and the distribution of metastases were reviewed and compared. We identified 215 patients with NSCLC harboring RET, ALK, or ROS1 gene fusion (RET = 32, ALK = 116, ROS1 = 67). Patients with RET+ NSCLC were older at presentation compared to ALK+ and ROS1+ patients (median age: RET = 64 years, ALK = 51 years, p &lt, 0.001, ROS = 54 years, p = 0.042) and had a higher frequency of neuroendocrine histology (RET = 12%, ALK = 2%, p = 0.025, ROS1 = 0%, p = 0.010). Primary tumors in RET+ patients were more likely to be peripheral (RET = 69%, ALK = 47%, p = 0.029, ROS1 = 36%, p = 0.003), whereas lobar location, size, and density were comparable across the three groups. RET+ NSCLC was associated with a higher frequency of brain metastases at diagnosis compared to ROS1+ NSCLC (RET = 32%, ROS1 = 10%, p = 0.039. Metastatic patterns were otherwise similar across the three molecular subgroups, with high incidences of lymphangitic carcinomatosis, pleural metastases, and sclerotic bone metastases. RET+ NSCLC shares several distinct radiologic features and metastatic spread with ALK+ and ROS1+ NSCLC. These features may suggest the presence of RET fusions and help identify patients who may benefit from further molecular genotyping.

Background Lorlatinib is a potent, third-generation ALK/ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) designed to penetrate the blood–brain barrier. Objective We report the cumulative incidence of central nervous system (CNS) and non-CNS progression with lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with ALK TKIs. Patients and methods In an ongoing phase II study (NCT01970865), 198 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC with ≥ 1 prior ALK TKI were enrolled into expansion cohorts (EXP) based on treatment history. Patients received lorlatinib 100 mg once daily. Patients were analyzed for progressive disease, categorized as CNS or non-CNS progression, by independent central review. Cumulative incidence probabilities were calculated adopting a competing risks approach. Results Fifty-nine patients received crizotinib as their only prior ALK TKI (EXP2–3A); cumulative incidence rates (CIRs) of CNS and non-CNS progression were both 22% at 12 months in patients with baseline CNS metastases (n = 37), and CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients without baseline CNS metastases [43% vs. 9% (n = 22)]. In patients who received ≥ 1 prior second-generation ALK TKI [EXP3B–5 (n = 139)], CIR of non-CNS progression at 12 months was higher versus that for CNS progression in patients both with and without baseline CNS metastases (35% vs. 23% (n = 94) and 55% vs. 12% (n = 45), respectively). Conclusions Lorlatinib showed substantial intracranial activity in patients with pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC, with or without baseline CNS metastases, whose disease progressed on crizotinib or second-generation ALK TKIs. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01970865. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11523-020-00702-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose Targeted therapy is the cornerstone of treatment of advanced EGFR-mutant non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Next-generation sequencing (NGS), the preferred method for genotyping, typically requires several weeks. Here, we assessed workflows designed to rapidly identify patients with actionable EGFR mutations and reduce time to initiation (TTI) of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–directed therapy. Patients and Methods We performed rapid testing for EGFR L858R mutations and exon 19 deletions on paraffin-embedded or frozen section biopsy specimens from newly diagnosed patients with metastatic NSCLC by using an EGFR-specific assay (rapid test). To determine clinical utility, we assessed concordance with NGS results, turnaround time, and TTI of EGFR therapy, and we evaluated reimbursement data. Results Between January 2015 and September 2017, we performed 243 rapid EGFR tests and identified EGFR mutations in 43 patients (18%). With NGS results as a reference, sensitivity and specificity of the rapid EGFR polymerase chain reaction assay were 98% and 100%, respectively. The median turnaround time for NGS was 14 days, compared with 7 days for rapid testing ( P < .001). In the rapid group, 95% of patients received an EGFR inhibitor in the first-line setting. The median TTI of EGFR therapy was significantly shorter in the rapid cohort when compared with 121 historical cases (22 v 37 days; P = .01). Escalation of the initiative into an interdisciplinary ultra-rapid next-day frozen-section workflow for highly symptomatic patients (n = 8) resulted in a reduction in the median (± standard deviation) turnaround time to 1 ± 0.4 days and allowed several patients to initiate therapy within 1 week of biopsy. An extended 9-month clinical evaluation phase confirmed operational sustainability (turnaround times: ultra-rapid, 0.81 ± 0.4 days; rapid, 3 ± 1.5 days), and a 63% reimbursement rate indicated financial sustainability. Conclusion Rapid genotyping facilitates earlier initiation of EGFR-directed therapies without compromising NGS workflows.

Background Patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) show a significant response to checkpoint inhibitor therapies, but the economic impact of these therapies is unknown. A decision analytic model was used to explore the effectiveness and cost burden of MSI-H/dMMR mCRC treatment. Methods The treatment of hypothetical patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC was simulated in 2 treatment scenarios: a third-line treatment and an exploratory first-line treatment. The treatments compared were nivolumab, ipilimumab and nivolumab, trifluridine and tipiracil (third-line treatment), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (first-line treatment). Disease progression, drug toxicity, and survival rates were based on the CheckMate 142, study of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapies (RECOURSE), and Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Southwest Oncology Group 80405 trials. The analyzed outcomes included survival (life-years), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results Ipilimumab with nivolumab was the most effective strategy (10.69 life-years and 9.25 QALYs for the third line; 10.69 life-years and 9.44 QALYs for the first line) in comparison with nivolumab (8.21 life-years and 6.76 QALYs for the third line; 8.21 life-years and 7.00 QALYs for the first line), trifluridine and tipiracil (0.74 life-years and 0.07 QALYs), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (2.72 life-years and 1.63 QALYs). However, neither checkpoint inhibitor therapy was cost-effective in comparison with trifluridine and tipiracil (nivolumab ICER, $153,000; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $162,700) or mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (nivolumab ICER, $150,700; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $158,700). Conclusions This modeling analysis found that both single and dual checkpoint blockade could be significantly more effective for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC than chemotherapy, but they were not cost-effective, largely because of drug costs. Decreases in drug pricing and/or the duration of maintenance nivolumab could make ipilimumab and nivolumab cost-effective. Prospective clinical trials should be performed to explore the optimal duration of maintenance nivolumab.

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.

The receptor tyrosine kinase rearranged during transfection (RET) is an oncogenic driver activated in multiple cancers, including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), medullary thyroid cancer (MTC), and papillary thyroid cancer. No approved therapies have been designed to target RET; treatment has been limited to multikinase inhibitors (MKI), which can have significant off-target toxicities and limited efficacy. BLU-667 is a highly potent and selective RET inhibitor designed to overcome these limitations. In vitro, BLU-667 demonstrated ≥10-fold increased potency over approved MKIs against oncogenic RET variants and resistance mutants. In vivo, BLU-667 potently inhibited growth of NSCLC and thyroid cancer xenografts driven by various RET mutations and fusions without inhibiting VEGFR2. In first-in-human testing, BLU-667 significantly inhibited RET signaling and induced durable clinical responses in patients with RET-altered NSCLC and MTC without notable off-target toxicity, providing clinical validation for selective RET targeting. Significance: Patients with RET-driven cancers derive limited benefit from available MKIs. BLU-667 is a potent and selective RET inhibitor that induces tumor regression in cancer models with RET mutations and fusions. BLU-667 attenuated RET signaling and produced durable clinical responses in patients with RET-altered tumors, clinically validating selective RET targeting. Cancer Discov; 8(7); 836–49. ©2018 AACR. See related commentary by Iams and Lovly, p. 797. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 781

Purpose Although programmed death (PD)-1 pathway inhibitors are now used in nearly all patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the large number of patients with NSCLC and concurrent autoimmune disease (AID) have been universally excluded from immunotherapy clinical trials. Therefore, the safety of PD-1 and PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors in patients with NSCLC and underlying AID is currently unknown. Methods As part of a multi-institutional effort, we retrospectively collected clinicopathologic data from patients with NSCLC and a history of AID who received monotherapy with either a PD-1 or a PD-L1 (herein referred to as PD-[L]1) inhibitor. Qualifying AIDs included but were not limited to: rheumatologic, neurologic, endocrine, GI, and dermatologic conditions. Results We identified 56 patients with NSCLC and an AID who received a PD-(L)1 inhibitor. At the time of treatment initiation, 18% of patients had active AID symptoms and 20% were receiving immunomodulatory agents for their AID. A total of 55% of patients developed an AID flare and/or an immune-related adverse event (irAE). Exacerbation of the AID occurred in 13 patients (23% of the whole cohort), four of whom required systemic corticosteroids. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 21 patients (38%). Among irAEs, 74% were grade 1 or 2 and 26% were grade 3 or 4; eight patients required corticosteroids for irAE management. PD-(L)1 therapy was permanently discontinued in eight patients (14%) because of irAEs. The overall response rate to immunotherapy in this population was 22%. Conclusion In patients with NSCLC with AID treated with a PD-(L)1 inhibitor, exacerbation of AID occurred in a minority of patients. The incidence of irAEs was similar to reported rates in clinical trials where patients with AID were excluded. Adverse events were generally manageable and infrequently led to permanent discontinuation of immunotherapy.

Purpose Despite the emerging role of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway inhibitors for patients with advanced lung cancer, a paucity of data are available on the activity of these agents among patients with brain metastases. We investigated the outcomes of PD-1 pathway inhibitors and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the treatment of patients with brain metastases from lung cancer. Methods and Materials We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of non-small-cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases consecutively treated with PD-1 pathway inhibitors and SRS at our institution from 2012 to 2017. Overall survival (OS), distant brain failure (DBF), and local control (LC) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox regression models. Results We identified 37 patients treated with SRS to 85 lesions (90.6% intact and 9.4% resected) and a median total of 7 doses of PD-1 pathway inhibitors (83.8% nivolumab, 10.8% atezolizumab, 5.4% pembrolizumab). Most lesions were treated with 18 Gy in a single fraction (n = 61; 71.8%). Patients treated with concurrent SRS and PD-1 pathway inhibitors had longer OS and reduced rates of DBF compared with patients treated with SRS before or after PD-1 pathway inhibitor therapy (1-year OS, 87.3% vs 70.0% vs 0%, P = .008; 1-year DBF, 38.5% vs 65.8% vs 100%, P = .042). LC was favorable among lesions treated with SRS concurrent with or after PD-1 pathway inhibitor therapy compared with before PD-1 pathway inhibitor therapy (1-year LC, 100% vs 72.3%, P = .016). Three lesions transiently enlarged after SRS and then had partially or completely resolved on follow-up imaging. Four patients required steroids for SRS-associated toxicity. No patient experienced grade ≥ 4 toxicity. Conclusions Concurrent treatment with SRS and PD-1 pathway inhibitors was associated with favorable OS and locoregional disease control. This combination of therapy was well tolerated and merits further evaluation in larger cohorts in a prospective setting.

KRAS is the most common oncogenic driver in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAC). We previously reported that STK11/LKB1 (KL) or TP53 (KP) comutations define distinct subgroups of KRAS-mutant LUAC. Here, we examine the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in these subgroups. Objective response rates to PD-1 blockade differed significantly among KL (7.4%), KP (35.7%), and K-only (28.6%) subgroups (P < 0.001) in the Stand Up To Cancer (SU2C) cohort (174 patients) with KRAS-mutant LUAC and in patients treated with nivolumab in the CheckMate-057 phase III trial (0% vs. 57.1% vs. 18.2%; P = 0.047). In the SU2C cohort, KL LUAC exhibited shorter progression-free (P < 0.001) and overall (P = 0.0015) survival compared with KRASMUT;STK11/LKB1WT LUAC. Among 924 LUACs, STK11/LKB1 alterations were the only marker significantly associated with PD-L1 negativity in TMBIntermediate/High LUAC. The impact of STK11/LKB1 alterations on clinical outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors extended to PD-L1–positive non–small cell lung cancer. In Kras-mutant murine LUAC models, Stk11/Lkb1 loss promoted PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor resistance, suggesting a causal role. Our results identify STK11/LKB1 alterations as a major driver of primary resistance to PD-1 blockade in KRAS-mutant LUAC. Significance: This work identifies STK11/LKB1 alterations as the most prevalent genomic driver of primary resistance to PD-1 axis inhibitors in KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma. Genomic profiling may enhance the predictive utility of PD-L1 expression and tumor mutation burden and facilitate establishment of personalized combination immunotherapy approaches for genomically defined LUAC subsets. Cancer Discov; 8(7); 822–35. ©2018 AACR. See related commentary by Etxeberria et al., p. 794. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 781

Background Long-term data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. Two phase III trials demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with the anti-programmed death-1 antibody nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous (CheckMate 017) and nonsquamous (CheckMate 057) NSCLC. We report results from ≥3 years’ follow-up, including subgroup analyses of patients with liver metastases, who historically have poorer prognosis among patients with NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or discontinuation. The primary end point of each study was OS. Patients with baseline liver metastases were pooled across studies by treatment for subgroup analyses. Results After 40.3 months’ minimum follow-up in CheckMate 017 and 057, nivolumab continued to show an OS benefit versus docetaxel: estimated 3-year OS rates were 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14% to 21%] versus 8% (95% CI, 6% to 11%) in the pooled population with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC. Nivolumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. Of 854 randomized patients across both studies, 193 had baseline liver metastases. Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50–0.91), consistent with findings from the overall pooled study population (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61–0.81). Rates of treatment-related hepatic adverse events (primarily grade 1–2 liver enzyme elevations) were slightly higher in nivolumab-treated patients with liver metastases (10%) than in the overall pooled population (6%). Conclusions After 3 years’ minimum follow-up, nivolumab continued to demonstrate an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. Similarly, nivolumab demonstrated an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with liver metastases, and remained well tolerated. Clinical trial registration CheckMate 017: NCT01642004; CheckMate 057: NCT01673867.

Introduction Intracranial metastases are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced NSCLC, and are frequently managed with radiation therapy (RT). The safety of cranial RT in the setting of treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has not been established. Methods We identified patients with advanced NSCLC with brain metastases who received cranial RT and were treated with or without programmed cell death 1/programmed death ligand 1 inhibitors between August 2013 and September 2016. RT-related adverse events (AEs) were retrospectively evaluated and analyzed according to ICI treatment status, cranial RT type, and timing of RT with respect to ICI. Results Of 163 patients, 50 (31%) received ICIs, whereas 113 (69%) were ICI naive. Overall, 94 (58%), 28 (17%), and 101 (62%) patients received stereotactic radiosurgery, partial brain irradiation, and/or whole brain RT, respectively. Fifty percent of patients received more than one radiation course. We observed no significant difference in rates of all-grade AEs and grade 3 or higher AEs between the ICI-naive and ICI-treated patients across different cranial RT types (grade ≥3 AEs in 8% of ICI-naive patients versus in 9% of ICI-treated patients for stereotactic radiosurgery [ p = 1.00] and in 8% of ICI-naive patients versus in 10% of ICI-treated patients for whole brain RT [ p = 0.71]). Additionally, there was no difference in AE rates on the basis of timing of ICI administration with respect to RT. Conclusions Treatment with an ICI and cranial RT was not associated with a significant increase in RT-related AEs, suggesting that use of programmed cell death 1/programmed death ligand 1 inhibitors in patients receiving cranial RT may have an acceptable safety profile. Nonetheless, additional studies are needed to validate this approach.

Purpose Treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is characterized by durable responses and improved survival in a subset of patients. Clinically available tools to optimize use of ICIs and understand the molecular determinants of response are needed. Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly routine, but its role in identifying predictors of response to ICIs is not known. Methods Detailed clinical annotation and response data were collected for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer treated with anti–programmed death-1 or anti–programmed death-ligand 1 [anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1] therapy and profiled by targeted NGS (MSK-IMPACT; n = 240). Efficacy was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, and durable clinical benefit (DCB) was defined as partial response/stable disease that lasted > 6 months. Tumor mutation burden (TMB), fraction of copy number–altered genome, and gene alterations were compared among patients with DCB and no durable benefit (NDB). Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed for 49 patients to compare quantification of TMB by targeted NGS versus WES. Results Estimates of TMB by targeted NGS correlated well with WES (ρ = 0.86; P < .001). TMB was greater in patients with DCB than with NDB ( P = .006). DCB was more common, and progression-free survival was longer in patients at increasing thresholds above versus below the 50th percentile of TMB (38.6% v 25.1%; P < .001; hazard ratio, 1.38; P = .024). The fraction of copy number–altered genome was highest in those with NDB. Variants in EGFR and STK11 associated with a lack of benefit. TMB and PD-L1 expression were independent variables, and a composite of TMB plus PD-L1 further enriched for benefit to ICIs. Conclusion Targeted NGS accurately estimates TMB and elevated TMB further improved likelihood of benefit to ICIs. TMB did not correlate with PD-L1 expression; both variables had similar predictive capacity. The incorporation of both TMB and PD-L1 expression into multivariable predictive models should result in greater predictive power.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as powerful new agents in the management of advanced, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In particular, monoclonal antibodies targeting the programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor and its ligand, PD-L1, have transformed treatment approaches for patients with advanced lung cancer. In a series of pivotal studies, the PD-1 inhibitors nivolumab and pembrolizumab and the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab produced signi cant improvements in overall survival compared to standard single- agent chemotherapy in previously treated patients (1-4).

Purpose The ROS1 tyrosine kinase is activated through ROS1 gene rearrangements in 1% to 2% of non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), which confer sensitivity to treatment with the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)/ROS1/mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor inhibitor crizotinib. Currently, insights into patterns of metastatic spread and mechanisms of crizotinib resistance among patients with ROS1-positive disease are limited. Patients and Methods We reviewed clinical and radiographic imaging data of patients with ROS1- and ALK-positive NSCLC to compare patterns of metastatic spread at initial metastatic diagnosis. To determine molecular mechanisms of crizotinib resistance, we analyzed repeat biopsy specimens from a cohort of patients with ROS1-positive disease who progressed on crizotinib. Results We identified 39 and 196 patients with advanced ROS1- and ALK-positive NSCLC, respectively. Patients with ROS1-positive disease had significantly lower rates of extrathoracic metastases ( ROS1, 59.0%; ALK, 83.2%; P = .002), including lower rates of brain metastases ( ROS1, 19.4%; ALK, 39.1%; P = .033), at initial metastatic diagnosis. Despite similar overall survival between patients with ALK- and ROS1-positive NSCLC treated with crizotinib (median, 3.0 v 2.5 years, respectively; P = .786), patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC also had a significantly lower cumulative incidence of brain metastases (34% v 73% at 5 years; P < .001). In addition, we identified 16 patients who underwent a total of 17 repeat biopsies after progression on crizotinib. ROS1 resistance mutations were identified in 53% of specimens, including nine (64%) of 14 non–brain metastasis specimens. ROS1 mutations included G2032R (41%), D2033N (6%), and S1986F (6%). Conclusion Compared with ALK rearrangements, ROS1 rearrangements are associated with lower rates of extrathoracic metastases, including fewer brain metastases, at initial metastatic diagnosis. ROS1 resistance mutations, particularly G2032R, appear to be the predominant mechanism of resistance to crizotinib, which underscores the need to develop novel ROS1 inhibitors with activity against these resistant mutants.

Summary Background Most patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK )-rearranged or ROS proto-oncogene 1 ( ROS1 )-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are sensitive to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy, but resistance invariably develops, commonly within the CNS. This study aimed to analyse the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic properties of lorlatinib, a novel, highly potent, selective, and brain-penetrant ALK and ROS1 TKI with preclinical activity against most known resistance mutations, in patients with advanced ALK -positive or ROS1 -positive NSCLC. Methods In this international multicentre, open-label, single-arm, first-in-man phase 1 dose-escalation study, eligible patients had advanced ALK -positive or ROS1 -positive NSCLC and were older than 18 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate end-organ function. Lorlatinib was administered orally to patients at doses ranging from 10 mg to 200 mg once daily or 35 mg to 100 mg twice daily, with a minimum of three patients receiving each dose. For some patients, tumour biopsy was done before lorlatinib treatment to identify ALK resistance mutations. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib; efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population (patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and had either ALK or ROS1 rearrangement). The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 according to investigator assessment; secondary endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics, and overall response. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970865. Findings Between Jan 22, 2014, and July 10, 2015, 54 patients received at least one dose of lorlatinib, including 41 (77%) with ALK -positive and 12 (23%) with ROS1 -positive NSCLC; one patient had unconfirmed ALK and ROS1 status. 28 (52%) patients had received two or more TKIs, and 39 (72%) patients had CNS metastases. The most common treatment-related adverse events among the 54 patients were hypercholesterolaemia (39 [72%] of 54 patients), hypertriglyceridaemia (21 [39%] of 54 patients), peripheral neuropathy (21 [39%] of 54 patients), and peripheral oedema (21 [39%] of 54 patients). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred at 200 mg (the patient did not take at least 16 of 21 prescribed total daily doses in cycle 1 because of toxicities attributable to study drug, which were grade 2 neurocognitive adverse events comprising slowed speech and mentation and word-finding difficulty). No maximum tolerated dose was identified. The recommended phase 2 dose was selected as 100 mg once daily. For ALK -positive patients, the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response was 19 (46%) of 41 patients (95% CI 31–63); for those who had received two or more TKIs, the proportion of patients with an objective response was 11 (42%) of 26 patients (23–63). In ROS1 -positive patients, including seven crizotinib-pretreated patients, an objective response was achieved by six (50%) of 12 patients (95% CI 21–79). Interpretation In this phase 1, dose-escalation study, lorlatinib showed both systemic and intracranial activity in patients with advanced ALK -positive or ROS1 -positive NSCLC, most of whom had CNS metastases and had previously had two or more TKI treatments fail. Therefore, lorlatinib might be an effective therapeutic strategy for patients with ALK -positive NSCLC who have become resistant to currently available TKIs, including second-generation ALK TKIs, and is being investigated in a phase 3 randomised controlled trial comparing lorlatinib to crizotinib (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03052608). Funding Pfizer.

Targeted therapies have transformed the management of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and placed an increased emphasis on stratifying patients on the basis of genetic alterations in oncogenic drivers. To date, the best characterized molecular targets in NSCLC are the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK). Despite steady advances in targeted therapies within these molecular subsets, however, acquired resistance to therapy is near universal. Recent preclinical models and translational efforts have provided critical insights into the molecular mechanisms of resistance to EGFR and ALK inhibitors. In this review, we present a framework for understanding resistance to targeted therapies. We also provide overviews of the molecular mechanisms of resistance and strategies to overcome resistance among EGFR-mutant and ALK-rearranged lung cancers. To date, these strategies have centered on the development of novel next-generation inhibitors, rationale combinations, and use of local ablative therapies, such as radiotherapy.

Introduction Chromosomal rearrangements involving the gene ROS1 define a distinct molecular subset of NSCLCs with sensitivity to ROS1 inhibitors. Recent reports have suggested a significant overlap between ROS1 fusions and other oncogenic driver alterations, including mutations in EGFR and KRAS . Methods We identified patients at our institution with ROS1 -rearranged NSCLC who had undergone testing for genetic alterations in additional oncogenes, including EGFR , KRAS , and anaplastic lymphoma receptor tyrosine kinase gene ( ALK ). Clinicopathologic features and genetic testing results were reviewed. We also examined a separate database of ROS1 -rearranged NSCLCs identified through the commercial FoundationOne assay (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA). Results Among 62 patients with ROS1 -rearranged NSCLC evaluated at our institution, none harbored concurrent ALK fusions (0%) or EGFR activating mutations (0%). KRAS mutations were detected in two cases (3.2%), one of which harbored a concurrent noncanonical KRAS I24N mutation of unknown biological significance. In a separate ROS1 fluorescence in situ hybridization–positive case, targeted sequencing failed to confirm a ROS1 fusion but instead identified a KRAS G13D mutation. No concurrent mutations in B-Raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase gene ( BRAF ), erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 gene ( ERBB2 ), phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha gene ( PIK3CA ), AKT/serine threonine kinase 1 gene ( AKT1 ), or mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1 gene ( MAP2K1 ) were detected. Analysis of an independent data set of 166 ROS1 -rearranged NSCLCs identified by FoundationOne demonstrated rare cases with co-occurring driver mutations in EGFR (one of 166) and KRAS (three of 166) and no cases with co-occurring ROS1 and ALK rearrangements. Conclusions ROS1 rearrangements rarely overlap with alterations in EGFR , KRAS , ALK , or other targetable oncogenes in NSCLC.

Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) may serve as a predictive biomarker for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies; however, little is known about intertumoral heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression determined by IHC in lung adenocarcinomas (ADCs), and there have been conflicting results on the prognostic role of PD-L1 expression in ADCs.PD-L1 expression was evaluated in resected stage II and III ADCs by using various cutoffs and correlated with clinicopathologic parameters and survival. PD-L1 expression was also compared between the primary tumor and lymph node metastases.There were 109 study cases. PD-L1 expression was seen in 56 (51%), 43 (39%), and 19 (17%) when cutoffs of at least 1%, at least 5%, and at least 50%, respectively, were used. Abundant intratumoral CD8-positive T cells were a significant predictor of the expression in the primary tumor, with cutoffs of 1% and 5% (p0.001 for both) by multivariate analysis, whereas they were a nonsignificant predictor of the expression with a 50% cutoff (p = 0.076). PD-L1 expression was concordant between the primary tumor and nodal metastasis in most of the cases, but it was discrepant in up to 38%. The discrepancy was attributed in part to different predominant histologic patterns between the primary and metastatic tumors. In the entire cohort, PD-L1 expression with all cutoffs had no bearing on 5-year recurrence-free survival.PD-L1 expression is associated with abundant intratumoral CD8-positive T cells in resected ADCs, suggesting a predictive role of PD-L1 expression in anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies; however, the possible intertumoral heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression raises a concern about selecting the most appropriate sample for PD-L1 IHC.