Search

Background: Despite promising outcomes of treatment with anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1 agents in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy (PDC) in the first-line setting, a significant unmet medical need remains in patients with PD-L1-unselected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: This multicenter, open-label, phase 1b study comprising dose-confirmation and dose-expansion parts investigated the combination of spartalizumab and various PDC regimens, with or without canakinumab, in treatment-naïve patients with PD-L1-unselected, metastatic NSCLC. The primary objectives were to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended dose for expansion (RDE) of spartalizumab, with or without canakinumab, in combination with PDC in the dose-confirmation part and antitumor activity of spartalizumab in the dose-expansion part., Results: The MTD/RDE of spartalizumab was 300 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W) when administered with either gemcitabine (1250 mg/m 2 )/cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ) (group A; no dose-limiting toxicities [DLTs]), pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 )/cisplatin (group B; 2 DLTs: grade 2 posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome and grade 4 hyponatremia), or paclitaxel (200 mg/m 2 )/carboplatin area under the curve 6 min*mg/mL (group C; 1 DLT: grade 4 neutropenic colitis). The RDE of canakinumab combined with spartalizumab and pemetrexed/cisplatin (group E; no DLTs) was 200 mg Q3W (no dose-expansion part was initiated). No new safety signals were identified. In groups A, B, C, and E, the overall response rates were 57.6%, 55.3%, 51.5%, and 57.1%, respectively. Group B compared with other groups had the longest median progression-free survival (10.4 months vs. 6.2-7.5 months), overall survival (29.7 months vs. 16.1-21.0 months), and duration of response (30.1 months vs. 6.0-8.2 months)., Conclusions: The combination of spartalizumab and PDC, with or without canakinumab, was well tolerated across treatment groups. The antitumor activity across treatment groups was comparable with that of pembrolizumab and pemetrexed combination. Canakinumab did not appear to improve the antitumor activity when combined with spartalizumab, pemetrexed and cisplatin., Trial Registration: The trial was registered in Clinicaltrials.gov with identifier no. NCT03064854. Date of Registration: 06 February 2017., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The phase 3 MYSTIC study of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumor cell (TC) programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 25% did not meet its primary endpoints. We report patient-reported outcomes (PROs)., Patients and Methods: Treatment-naïve patients were randomized (1:1:1) to durvalumab, durvalumab + tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. PROs were assessed in patients with PD-L1 TC ≥ 25% using EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. Changes from baseline (12 months) for prespecified PRO endpoints of interest were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time to deterioration (TTD) by stratified log-rank tests., Results: There were no between-arm differences in baseline PROs (N = 488). Between-arm differences in MMRM-adjusted mean changes from baseline favored at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for C30 fatigue: durvalumab (-9.5; 99% confidence interval [CI], -17.0 to -2.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (-11.7; 99% CI, -19.4 to -4.1); and for C30 appetite loss: durvalumab (-11.9; 99% CI, -21.1 to -2.7). TTD was longer with at least one of the durvalumab-containing arms versus chemotherapy (nominal P < .01) for global health status/quality of life: durvalumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0); and for physical functioning: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30); as well as for the key symptoms of dyspnea: durvalumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-1.0) (both LC13); fatigue: durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8); and appetite loss: durvalumab (HR = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), durvalumab + tremelimumab (HR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) (both C30)., Conclusion: Durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy reduced symptom burden and improved TTD of PROs, suggesting it had no detrimental effects on quality of life in metastatic NSCLC patients., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD-L1) as monotherapies or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 have shown clinical activity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer., Objective: To compare durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial (MYSTIC) was conducted at 203 cancer treatment centers in 17 countries. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who had no sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized to receive treatment with durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. Data were collected from July 21, 2015, to October 30, 2018., Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks), durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) plus tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks, up to 4 doses), or platinum-based doublet chemotherapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end points, assessed in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab vs chemotherapy, and OS and progression-free survival (PFS) for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy. Analysis of blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) was exploratory., Results: Between July 21, 2015, and June 8, 2016, 1118 patients were randomized. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Among 488 patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 12.2-20.8) with durvalumab vs 12.9 months (95% CI, 10.5-15.0) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 97.54% CI, 0.56-1.02; P = .04 [nonsignificant]). Median OS was 11.9 months (95% CI, 9.0-17.7) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR vs chemotherapy, 0.85; 98.77% CI, 0.61-1.17; P = .20). Median PFS was 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.8-5.0) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-5.8) with chemotherapy (HR, 1.05; 99.5% CI, 0.72-1.53; P = .71). Among 809 patients with evaluable bTMB, those with a bTMB ≥20 mutations per megabase showed improved OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy (median OS, 21.9 months [95% CI, 11.4-32.8] vs 10.0 months [95% CI, 8.1-11.7]; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55 (14.9%) of 369 patients who received treatment with durvalumab, 85 (22.9%) of 371 patients who received treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and 119 (33.8%) of 352 patients who received treatment with chemotherapy. These adverse events led to death in 2 (0.5%), 6 (1.6%), and 3 (0.9%) patients, respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: The phase 3 MYSTIC study did not meet its primary end points of improved OS with durvalumab vs chemotherapy or improved OS or PFS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1. Exploratory analyses identified a bTMB threshold of ≥20 mutations per megabase for optimal OS benefit with durvalumab plus tremelimumab., Trial Registration: ClinicalT rials.gov Identifier: NCT02453282.

Background: Seribantumab (MM-121) is a fully human IgG2 monoclonal antibody that binds to human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 ( HER3/ErbB3 ) to block heregulin ( HRG/NRG )-mediated ErbB3 signaling and induce receptor downregulation. This open-label, randomized phase 1/2 study evaluated safety and efficacy of seribantumab plus erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we report the activity of seribantumab plus erlotinib, versus erlotinib alone, in patients with EGFR wild-type tumors and describe the potential predictive power of HRG., Materials and Methods: Patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC were assigned randomly to receive seribantumab + erlotinib or erlotinib alone. Patients underwent pretreatment core needle biopsy and archived tumor samples were collected to support prespecified biomarker analyses., Results: One hundred twenty-nine patients received seribantumab + erlotinib ( n = 85) or erlotinib alone ( n = 44). Median estimated progression-free survival (PFS) in the unselected intent-to-treat (ITT) population was 8.1 and 7.7 weeks in the experimental and control arm, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.822; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.828; p = 0.63), and median estimated overall survival was 27.3 and 40.3 weeks in the experimental and control arm, respectively (HR, 1.395; 95% CI, 0.846 to 2.301; p = .1898) In patients whose tumors had detectable HRG mRNA expression, treatment benefit was observed in the seribantumab + erlotinib combination (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16-0.76; p = .008). In contrast, in patients whose tumors were HRG negative, the HR was 2.15 (95% CI, 0.97-4.76; p = .059, HRG-by-treatment interaction, p value = .0016)., Conclusion: The addition of seribantumab to erlotinib did not result in improved PFS in unselected patients. However, predefined retrospective exploratory analyses suggest that detectable HRG mRNA levels identified patients who might benefit from seribantumab. An ongoing clinical trial of seribantumab, in combination with docetaxel, is underway in patients with advanced NSCLC and high HRG mRNA expression (NCT02387216)., Implications for Practice: The poor prognosis of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) underscores the need for more effective treatment options, highlighting the unmet medical need in this patient population. The results of this study show that a novel biomarker, heregulin, may help to identify patients with advanced NSCLC who could benefit from treatment with seribantumab. On the basis of the observed safety profile and promising clinical efficacy, a prospective, randomized, open-label, international, multicenter phase II trial (SHERLOC, NCT02387216) is under way to investigate the efficacy and safety of seribantumab in combination with docetaxel in patients with heregulin-positive advanced adenocarcinoma., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

Background: The VeriStrat test provides accurate predictions of outcomes in all lines of therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated the predictive and prognostic role of VeriStrat in patients enrolled on the MARQUEE phase III trial of tivantinib plus erlotinib (T+E) versus placebo plus erlotinib (P+E) in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: Pretreatment plasma samples were available for 996 patients and were analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry to generate VeriStrat labels (good, VS-G, or poor, VS-P)., Results: Overall, no significant benefit in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were observed for the addition of tivantinib to erlotinib. Regardless of treatment arm, patients who were classified as VS-G had significantly longer PFS (3.8 mo for T+E arm, 2.0 mo for P+E arm) and OS (11.6 mo for T+E, 10.2 mo for P+E arm) than patients classified as VS-P (PFS: 1.9 mo for both arms, hazard ratio [HR], 0.584; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.468-0.733; p < .0001 for T+E, HR, 0.686; 95% CI, 0.546-0.870; p = .0015 for P+E; OS: 4.0 mo for both arms, HR, 0.333; 95% CI, 0.264-0.422; p < .0001 for T+E; HR, 0.449; 95% CI, 0.353-0.576; p < .0001 for P+E). The VS-G population had higher OS than the VS-P population within Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS) categories. VS-G patients on the T+E arm had longer PFS, but not OS, than VS-G patients on the P+E arm ( p = .0108). Among EGFR mutation-positive patients, those with VS-G status had a median OS more than twice that of any other group (OS: 31.6 mo for T+E and 22.8 mo for P+E), whereas VS-P patients had similar survival rates as VS-G, EGFR-wild type patients (OS: 13.7 mo for T+E and 6.5 mo for P+E)., Conclusion: In these analyses, VeriStrat showed a prognostic role within EGOC PS categories and regardless of treatment arm and EGFR status, suggesting that VeriStrat could be used to identify EGFR mutation-positive patients who will have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Implications for Practice: This study suggests that VeriStrat testing could enhance the prognostic role of performance status and smoking status and replicates findings from other trials that showed that the VeriStrat test identifies EGFR mutation-positive patients likely to have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Although these findings should be confirmed in other populations, VeriStrat use could be considered in EGFR mutation-positive patients as an additional prognostic tool, and these results suggest that EGFR mutation-positive patients with VeriStrat "poor" classification could benefit from other therapeutic agents given in conjunction with TKI monotherapy., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Introduction: Osimertinib is a third-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Durvalumab is an anti-programmed death ligand 1 monoclonal antibody. The phase III open-label CAURAL trial (NCT02454933) investigated osimertinib plus durvalumab versus osimertinib monotherapy in patients with EGFR-TKI sensitizing and EGFR T790M mutation-positive advanced NSCLC and disease progression after EGFR-TKI therapy., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive orally administered osimertinib (80 mg once daily) with or without durvalumab (10 mg/kg administered intravenously every 2 weeks) until progression. Treatment could continue beyond progression, providing clinical benefit continued (judged by the investigator). The amended primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of osimertinib plus durvalumab; efficacy was an exploratory objective., Results: CAURAL recruitment was terminated early because of increased incidence of interstitial lung disease-like events in the osimertinib plus durvalumab arm from the separate phase Ib TATTON trial (NCT02143466). At termination of CAURAL recruitment, 15 patients had been randomly assigned to treatment with osimertinib and 14 to treatment with osimertinib plus durvalumab. The most common AEs were diarrhea (53% [grade ≥3 in 6% of patients]) in the osimertinib arm and rash (67% [grade ≥3 in 0 patients]) in the combination arm. One patient who had been randomized to the combination arm reported grade 2 interstitial lung disease while receiving osimertinib monotherapy (after discontinuing durvalumab therapy after one dose). The objective response rates were 80% in the osimertinib arm and 64% in the combination arm., Conclusion: Limited patient numbers preclude formal safety and efficacy comparisons between the two treatment arms. The combination of programmed cell death 1/programmed death ligand 1 inhibitors and EGFR-TKIs as therapy for NSCLC is not well understood, but it requires a careful approach if considered in the future., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: KRAS and TP53 are common mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The Lung Adjuvant Cisplatin Evaluation Biological Program group found adjuvant chemotherapy to be deleterious in patients with coexisting KRAS/TP53 mutations., Patients and Methods: To validate these results, patients with NSCLC tested for KRAS and TP53 mutations and receiving chemotherapy for any stage NSCLC were selected. Mutation status was analyzed using next generation sequencing (Illumina) or multiplex recurrent mutation detection (MassARRAY, Agena Biosciences) assays, and was correlated with clinical and demographic data. Disease-free (DFS) or progression-free survival (PFS) was the main endpoint, and overall survival (OS) was the secondary endpoint., Results: Among 218 patients, 28 had coexisting KRAS/TP53 mutations, 77 TP53, 37 KRAS, 76 had neither KRAS nor TP53 mutation (WT/WT). There was no DFS/PFS difference for the KRAS/TP53 group versus all others among 99 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-2.44; P = .57), 27 stage III patients who received chemo-radiation (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.32-2.38; P = .8), and 63 patients who received palliative chemotherapy (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.31-1.48; P = .33). OS was longer in the WT/WT group compared with any other group (KRAS: HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.02-3.43; P = .043; TP53: HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.3-3.61; P = .0028; KRAS/TP53: HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.09-3.88; P = .026). No OS difference was seen for KRAS/TP53 compared with the other groups (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.75-2.13; P = .38)., Conclusions: There was no significant difference in DFS/PFS between the 4 groups. However, OS was longer for patients with TP53 and KRAS wild-type NSCLC who received chemotherapy for any stage compared with patients with KRAS, TP53 mutation, or double mutant tumors., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This exploratory subgroup analysis of the MARQUEE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of erlotinib plus tivantinib in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC., Methods: Patients with advanced, nonsquamous, EGFR and mesenchymal-epithelial transition inhibitor-naive NSCLC previously treated with one or two lines of systemic therapy were randomized to oral erlotinib (150 mg once daily) plus tivantinib (360 mg twice daily) or to erlotinib plus placebo. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: Among 1048 patients enrolled, 109 (10.4%) had EGFR-mutant disease. Erlotinib plus tivantinib improved progression-free survival in this subpopulation; median progression-free survival was 13.0 months for erlotinib plus tivantinib (n = 56) and 7.5 months for erlotinib plus placebo (n = 53) (hazard ratio = 0.49, 95% confidence interval: 0.31-0.77). Deaths occurred in 73 patients (67%), and median overall survival was 25.5 months in the erlotinib plus tivantinib arm versus 20.3 months in the erlotinib plus placebo arm (hazard ratio = 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.43-1.08). Common adverse events included diarrhea, rash, and asthenia. Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were more common with erlotinib plus tivantinib., Conclusions: Erlotinib plus tivantinib was tolerable and showed improved efficacy over erlotinib monotherapy in previously treated EGFR-mutant NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A majority of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Patients who have advanced NSCLC that is especially aggressive, which is defined as disease that rapidly progresses on first-line treatment or disease that is refractory to first-line treatment, have a critical unmet medical need. These patients have a poor prognosis in the second-line setting. Several studies have recently shown that treatment with an antiangiogenic therapy may benefit these patients. This review summarizes the approved antiangiogenic therapies for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC in the second-line setting, specifically focusing on the outcomes from subgroups of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory disease. Several antiangiogenic agents, as monotherapy or in combination with other treatments, have been or are currently being studied in patients with advanced NSCLC. Antiangiogenics that are approved for use in patients with advanced NSCLC are limited to bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy (nonsquamous NSCLC), ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel (all histologies), and nintedanib in combination with docetaxel (adenocarcinoma histology). This review focuses on the efficacy, safety, and quality of life outcomes in the subpopulation of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory NSCLC treated with approved antiangiogenic therapies in the second-line setting. We also discuss the impact of newly approved immunotherapy agents on the outcomes of patients with aggressive or refractory disease. Studies in progress and planned future research will determine if combination treatment with antiangiogenics and immunotherapies will benefit patients with aggressive, advanced NSCLC., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objectives: The REVEL study demonstrated improved efficacy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with ramucirumab plus docetaxel, independent of histology. This exploratory analysis characterized the treatment effect in REVEL patients who were refractory to prior first-line treatment., Materials and Methods: Refractory patients had a best response of progressive disease to first-line treatment. Endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL), and safety. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed for OS and PFS, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used for response. QoL was assessed with the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale. Sensitivity analyses were performed on subgroups of the intent-to-treat population with limited time on first-line therapy., Results: Of 1253 randomized patients in REVEL, 360 (29%) were refractory to first-line treatment. Baseline characteristics were largely balanced between treatment arms. In the control arm, median OS for refractory patients was 6.3 versus 10.3 months for patients not meeting this criterion, demonstrating the poor prognosis of refractory patients. Median OS (8.3 vs. 6.3 months; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.68-1.08), median PFS (4.0 vs. 2.5 months; HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88), and ORR (22.5% vs. 12.6%) were improved in refractory patients treated with ramucirumab compared to placebo, without new safety concerns or further deteriorating patient QoL., Conclusions: The effect of ramucirumab in refractory patients is similar to that in the intent-to-treat population. The benefit/risk profile for refractory patients suggests that ramucirumab plus docetaxel is an appropriate treatment option even in this difficult-to-treat population., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Economic analyses of upcoming treatments for lung cancer benefit from real-world health utility scores (HUSs) in an era of targeted therapy., Methods: A longitudinal cohort study at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre evaluated 1571 EQ5D-3L-derived HUSs in 475 outpatients with metastatic lung cancer across various disease states. Patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (n = 183) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) (n = 38) driver alterations were enriched through targeted enrolment; patients with wild-type non-small-cell lung cancer (WT NSCLC) (n = 224) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) (n = 30) were sampled randomly., Results: For patients stable on most appropriate treatment, the mean HUSs were 0.81 and 0.82 in patients receiving EGFR and ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) respectively (with similar HUSs across agents), which were higher than patients with WT NSCLC (0.78; P = .04) and SCLC receiving chemotherapy (0.72; P = .06). In mutation-specific comparisons, disease stability on appropriate therapy resulted in significantly higher mean HUSs (P < .002-.02) than when disease was progressing (mean HUS: EGFR, 0.70; ALK, 0.69; WT NSCLC, 0.66; SCLC, 0.52). When evaluating treatment-related toxicities, significant inverse relationships were observed between HUS and the severity of fatigue and decreased appetite in the EGFR group. There was also a significant inverse relationship between the total number of clinically significant symptoms and HUS, both in patients who were EGFR-mutated and patients with WT NSCLC., Conclusions: In a North American setting, HUSs generated from patients with metastatic lung cancer are higher in treated, stable patients carrying driver mutations. This is partially explainable by treatment toxicity and patient symptom differences. Such differences in scores should be considered in economic analyses., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This two-part study evaluated trametinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in combination with anticancer agents. Inhibition of MEK, a downstream effector of KRAS, demonstrated preclinical synergy with chemotherapy in KRAS-mutant NSCLC cell lines. Part 1 of this study identified recommended phase 2 doses of trametinib combinations. Part 2, reported herein, evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of trametinib combinations in patients with NSCLC with and without KRAS mutations., Methods: Phase 1b evaluated trametinib plus docetaxel with growth factor support (trametinib, 2.0 mg once daily, and docetaxel, 75 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks) or pemetrexed (trametinib, 1.5 mg once daily, and pemetrexed, 500 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks). Eligibility criteria for the expansion cohorts included metastatic NSCLC with measurable disease, known KRAS mutation status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or lower, and no more than two prior regimens., Results: The primary end point of overall response rate (ORR) was met for both combinations. A confirmed partial response (PR) was observed in 10 of the 47 patients with NSCLC who received trametinib plus docetaxel (21%). The ORR was 18% (four PRs in 22 patients) in those with KRAS wild-type NSCLC versus 24% (six PRs in 25 patients) in those with KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Of the 42 patients with NSCLC treated with trametinib plus pemetrexed, six (14%) had a PR; the ORR was 17% (four of 23) in patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC versus 11% (two of 19) in KRAS wild-type NSCLC. Adverse events-most commonly diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue-were manageable., Conclusions: Trametinib-plus-chemotherapy combinations were tolerable. Clinical activity exceeding the ORRs previously reported with docetaxel or pemetrexed alone in KRAS-mutated NSCLC and meeting prespecified criteria was observed., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Osimertinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. The efficacy of osimertinib as compared with platinum-based therapy plus pemetrexed in such patients is unknown., Methods: In this randomized, international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned 419 patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, who had disease progression after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy, in a 2:1 ratio to receive either oral osimertinib (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) or intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus either carboplatin (target area under the curve, 5 [AUC5]) or cisplatin (75 mg per square meter) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles; maintenance pemetrexed was allowed. In all the patients, disease had progressed during receipt of first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival., Results: The median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (10.1 months vs. 4.4 months; hazard ratio; 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.41; P<0.001). The objective response rate was significantly better with osimertinib (71%; 95% CI, 65 to 76) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (31%; 95% CI, 24 to 40) (odds ratio for objective response, 5.39; 95% CI, 3.47 to 8.48; P<0.001). Among 144 patients with metastases to the central nervous system (CNS), the median duration of progression-free survival was longer among patients receiving osimertinib than among those receiving platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (8.5 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.49). The proportion of patients with adverse events of grade 3 or higher was lower with osimertinib (23%) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (47%)., Conclusions: Osimertinib had significantly greater efficacy than platinum therapy plus pemetrexed in patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (including those with CNS metastases) in whom disease had progressed during first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; AURA3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02151981 .).

Background: Nivolumab has shown improved survival in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. We assessed the safety and activity of combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy for NSCLC., Methods: The open-label, phase 1, multicohort study (CheckMate 012) cohorts reported here were enrolled at eight US academic centres. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed recurrent stage IIIb or stage IV, chemotherapy-naive NSCLC. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 12 weeks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicities, or withdrawal of consent. Data from the latter two cohorts, which were considered potentially suitable for further clinical development, are presented in this report; data from the other cohort (as well as several earlier cohorts) are described in the appendix. The primary outcome was safety and tolerability, assessed in all treated patients. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01454102., Findings: Between May 15, 2014, and March 25, 2015, 78 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab every 12 weeks (n=38) or nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab every 6 weeks (n=40). One patient in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort was excluded before treatment; therefore 77 patients actually received treatment (38 in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort; 39 in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort). At data cut-off on Jan 7, 2016, 29 (76%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 32 (82%) in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort had discontinued treatment. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 14 (37%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 13 (33%) patients in the every-6-weeks cohort; the most commonly reported grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were increased lipase (three [8%] and no patients), pneumonitis (two [5%] and one [3%] patients), adrenal insufficiency (one [3%] and two [5%] patients), and colitis (one [3%] and two [5%] patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 12 (32%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 11 (28%) patients in the every-6-weeks cohort. Treatment-related adverse events (any grade) prompted treatment discontinuation in four (11%) patients in the every-12-weeks cohort and five (13%) patients in the every-6-weeks cohort. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Confirmed objective responses were achieved in 18 (47% [95% CI 31-64]) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 15 (38% [95% CI 23-55]) patients in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort; median duration of response was not reached in either cohort, with median follow-up times of 12·8 months (IQR 9·3-15·5) in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 11·8 months (6·7-15·9) in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort. In patients with PD-L1 of 1% or greater, confirmed objective responses were achieved in 12 (57%) of 21 patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 13 (57%) of 23 patients in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort., Interpretation: In NSCLC, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab had a tolerable safety profile and showed encouraging clinical activity characterised by a high response rate and durable response. To our knowledge, the results of this study are the first suggestion of improved benefit compared with anti-PD-1 monotherapy in patients with NSCLC, supporting further assessment of this combination in a phase 3 study., Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) improved survival in the NCIC Clinical Trials Group JBR.10 trial of resected stage IB/II non-small-cell lung cancer. A prognostic 15-gene expression signature was developed, which may also predict for benefit from ACT. An exploratory economic analysis was conducted to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of using the 15-gene signature in guiding ACT decisions., Methods: A decision analytic model was populated by study patients with quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tumor profiling, current costs, and quality-adjusted survival. Analysis was performed over the 6-year follow-up from the perspective of the Canadian public health care system in 2015 Canadian dollars (discounted 5%/year). Incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were determined for ACT versus observation using clinical stage, gene signature, or a combined approach to select treatment., Results: The mean survival gain of ACT versus observation was higher using the gene signature (1.86 years) compared with clinical stage (1.28 years). Although more costly, ACT guided by the gene signature remained cost-effective at $10,421/life-year gained (95% confidence interval [CI], $466-$19,568 Canadian), comparable to stage-directed selection ($7081/life-year gained; 95% CI, -$2370 to $14,721; P = .52). Incremental cost-utility ratios were $13,452/quality-adjusted life-year (95% CI, $373-$31,949) and $9194/quality-adjusted life-year (95% CI, -$4104 to $23,952), respectively (P = .53). Comparing the standard and test-and-treat approaches, use of the gene signature did not significantly alter survival compared with the standard strategy, but it reduced the ACT rate by 25%., Conclusion: If validated, the use of the 15-gene expression signature to select patients for ACT may increase the survival gain of treatment in patients with high-risk stage IB/II non-small-cell lung cancer, while avoiding toxicities in low-risk patients., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Nivolumab, a fully human immunoglobulin G4 programmed death-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, has demonstrated improved survival in previously treated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). CheckMate 012, a phase I, multicohort study, was conducted to explore the safety and efficacy of nivolumab as monotherapy or combined with current standard therapies in first-line advanced NSCLC. Here, we report results for nivolumab plus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (PT-DC)., Patients and Methods: Patients (N = 56) received nivolumab (intravenously) plus PT-DC concurrently every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by nivolumab alone until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Regimens were nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus gemcitabine-cisplatin (squamous) or pemetrexed-cisplatin (nonsquamous) or nivolumab 5 or 10 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin (all histologies). The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. Secondary objectives included objective response rate and 24-week progression-free survival rate (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1); exploratory objectives included overall survival (OS) and response by tumor programmed death ligand-1 expression., Results: No dose-limiting toxicities occurred during the first 6 weeks of treatment. Forty-five percent of patients (25 of 56 patients) reported grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs); 7% of patients (n = 4) had pneumonitis. Twenty-one percent of patients (n = 12) discontinued all study therapy as a result of treatment-related AEs. Objective response rates for nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus gemcitabine-cisplatin, nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus pemetrexed-cisplatin, nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin, and nivolumab 5 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin were 33%, 47%, 47%, and 43%, respectively; 24-week progression-free survival rates were 51%, 71%, 38%, and 51%, respectively; 2-year OS rates were 25%, 33%, 27%, and 62%, respectively. Responses were achieved regardless of tumor programmed death ligand-1 expression., Conclusion: The safety profile of nivolumab plus PT-DC was consistent with that expected for individual agents; however, treatment discontinuation related to AEs was greater with the combination. Encouraging activity was observed, especially for the nivolumab 5 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin group, with a 2-year OS rate of 62%., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) kinase domain T790M (amino acid substitution at position 790 in EGFR from threonine [T] to methionine [M]) mutation in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) results in resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We used a patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) model containing an EGFR exon 19 deletion/T790M mutation to assess response to the EGFR-directed antibody cetuximab. Changes in the EGFR signaling pathway and ligand expression after treatment were investigated., Methods: PDX were randomized into control and treatment arms. Pharmacodynamic studies were performed at 2 and 24 hours and at 4 days after a single administration of cetuximab, erlotinib, or dacomitinib. Changes in the EGFR signaling pathway were assessed using Western blot analysis, and baseline mRNA expression of EGFR ligands using microarray analysis. Relative changes after treatment were assessed using quantitative polymerase chain reaction., Results: The xenograft showed a dramatic response to cetuximab. A complete reduction of total EGFR and phosphorylated EGFR occurred after cetuximab treatment. The PDX had increased baseline levels of heparin-binding epidermal growth factor-like growth factor (HB-EGF) compared with other PDX models with or without EGFR mutations. Amphiregulin was significantly reduced 2 hours after treatment with cetuximab. Compared with control mice, cetuximab- and EGFR-TKI-treated mice had significantly reduced HB-EGF gene expression at 2 hours, however, by day 4 the level of HB-EGF expression was higher. The effect of cetuximab compared with EGFR TKI on HB-EGF gene expression levels differed significantly at 2 and 24 hours but not at 4 days., Conclusion: We showed a dramatic tumor response with cetuximab in an exon 19 deletion/T790M EGFR mutant lung adenocarcinoma PDX model, which suggests a role for the autocrine feedback loop in the mutant EGFR signaling pathway. Further investigation using cetuximab in NSCLC with T790M mutation is warranted., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Tumor protein p53 gene (TP53) mutations are common in stage I through III non-small cell lung cancer, but clinical trials have shown inconsistent results regarding their relationship to the effects of adjuvant therapy. The objective is to clarify their putative prognostic and predictive effects., Methods: A pooled analysis of TP53 mutations (exons 5-8) was conducted in four randomized trials (the International Adjuvant Lung Cancer Trial, J BRonchus 10, Cancer and Leukemia Group B-9633, and Adjuvant Navelbine International Trialist Association trial) of platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) versus observation (OBS). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of mutant versus wild-type (WT) TP53 for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated using a multivariable Cox model stratified on trial and adjusted on sex, age, and clinicopathological variables. Predictive value was evaluated with an interaction between treatment and TP53., Results: A total of 1209 patients (median follow-up 5.5 years) were included. There were 573 deaths (47%) and 653 DFS events (54%). Mutations (434 [36%]) had no prognostic effect (OBS HROS = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.77-1.28, p = 0.95; HRDFS = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.78-1.25, p = 0.92) but were marginally predictive of benefit from ACT for OS (test for interaction: OS, p = 0.06; DFS, p = 0.11). Patients with WT TP53 had a tendency toward better outcomes with ACT than did those in the OBS group (HROS = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.95, p = 0.02; HRDFS = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62-0.92, p = 0.005). In the ACT arm, a deleterious effect of mutant versus WT TP53 was observed (HROS = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.10-1.78, p = 0.006; HRDFS = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.04-1.64, p = 0.02)., Conclusions: TP53 mutation had no prognostic effect but was marginally predictive for survival from ACT. In patients who received ACT, TP53 mutation tended to be associated with shorter survival than wild-type TP53., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Tumor lymphocytic infiltration (TLI) has differing prognostic value among various cancers. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of TLI in lung cancer., Patients and Methods: A discovery set (one trial, n = 824) and a validation set (three trials, n = 984) that evaluated the benefit of platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer were used as part of the LACE-Bio (Lung Adjuvant Cisplatin Evaluation Biomarker) study. TLI was defined as intense versus nonintense. The main end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and specific DFS (SDFS). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs associated with TLI were estimated through a multivariable Cox model in both sets. TLI-histology and TLI-treatment interactions were explored in the combined set., Results: Discovery and validation sets with complete data included 783 (409 deaths) and 763 (344 deaths) patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 4.8 and 6 years, respectively. TLI was intense in 11% of patients in the discovery set compared with 6% in the validation set (P < .001). The prognostic value of TLI in the discovery set (OS: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.81; P = .002; DFS: HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.83; P = .002; SDFS: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.82; P = .003) was confirmed in the validation set (OS: HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.85; P = .01; DFS: HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.78; P = .005; SDFS: HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.80; P = .008) with no heterogeneity across trials (P ≥ .38 for all end points). No significant predictive effect was observed for TLI (P ≥ .78 for all end points)., Conclusion: Intense lymphocytic infiltration, found in a minority of tumors, was validated as a favorable prognostic marker for survival in resected non-small-cell lung cancer., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Tivantinib, a MET receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, demonstrated increased anticancer activity in preclinical and early clinical studies when combined with erlotinib. Our study aimed to confirm efficacy and safety of the combination in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC previously treated with one to two systemic regimens, including a platinum doublet, were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive erlotinib 150 mg daily plus oral tivantinib 360 mg twice daily (E + T) or erlotinib plus placebo (E + P) until disease progression. Tumor specimens were evaluated for EGFR and KRAS mutations, MET expression, and MET gene amplification. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary and exploratory objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), OS in molecular subgroups, and safety., Results: The study enrolled 1,048 patients and was discontinued for futility at the interim analysis. OS did not improve with E + T versus E + P (median OS, 8.5 v 7.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.15; P = .81), even though PFS increased (median PFS, 3.6 v 1.9 months; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.89; P < .001). Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested OS improvement in patients with high MET expression (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.01). Most common adverse events occurring with E + T versus E + P were rash (33.1% v 37.3%, respectively), diarrhea (34.6% v 41.0%), asthenia or fatigue (43.5% v 38.1%), and neutropenia (grade 3 to 4; 8.5% v 0.8%)., Conclusion: E + T was well tolerated and increased PFS but did not improve OS in the overall nonsquamous NSCLC population., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Introduction: The phase III FLEX study (NCT00148798) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer indicated that the survival benefit associated with the addition of cetuximab to cisplatin and vinorelbine was limited to patients whose tumors expressed high levels of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (immunohistochemistry score of ≥200; scale 0-300). We assessed whether the treatment effect was also modulated in FLEX study patients by tumor EGFR mutation status., Methods: A tumor mutation screen of EGFR exons 18 to 21 included 971 of 1125 (86%) FLEX study patients. Treatment outcome in low and high EGFR expression groups was analyzed across efficacy endpoints according to tumor EGFR mutation status., Results: Mutations in EGFR exons 18 to 21 were detected in 133 of 971 tumors (14%), 970 of which were also evaluable for EGFR expression level. The most common mutations were exon 19 deletions and L858R (124 of 133 patients; 93%). In the high EGFR expression group (immunohistochemistry score of ≥200), a survival benefit for the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy was demonstrated in patients with EGFR wild-type (including T790M mutant) tumors. Although patient numbers were small, those in the high EGFR expression group whose tumors carried EGFR mutations may also have derived a survival benefit from the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy. Response data suggested a cetuximab benefit in the high EGFR expression group regardless of EGFR mutation status., Conclusions: The survival benefit associated with the addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer expressing high levels of EGFR is not limited by EGFR mutation status.

The insulin-like growth factor receptor is a potential target in small-cell lung cancer. We conducted a phase I study of cisplatin, etoposide plus dalotuzumab. Two dose levels of dalotuzumab (DL1 5 mg/kg, DL2 10mg/kg IV weekly) were evaluated in combination with cisplatin (25 mg/m²) and etoposide (100 mg/m²) IV D1-3, every 21 days, for patients with chemotherapy-naive extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. Primary outcome was determination of the recommended phase 2 dose. Secondary outcomes included response rate and toxicity. Twelve patients were treated (DL1, 3 and DL2, 9). The median age was 63 years (48-70), with six males and six females. The majority of patients were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1 and had four or more sites of disease. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in DL1 or DL2, although one patient died from neutropenic sepsis in an expanded cohort at DL2. The recommended phase 2 dose of dalotuzumab was 10 mg/kg/week. The confirmed objective response rate was 67% (partial response 8, stable disease 2, progressive disease 1, nonevaluable 1). Grade 3 or higher toxicities (any cycle) occurring in more than one patient included: neutropenia (92%); thrombocytopenia (25%); leukopenia (50%); anemia (17%); fatigue (33%); joint pain (17%); thrombosis (25%). Grade 2 or 3 hyperglycemia was observed in one of three (DL1) and five of nine (DL2) patients. Eight serious adverse events (thrombosis, febrile neutropenia, infection, syncope, fatigue [2], dyspnea, back pain) were observed in three patients. Dalotuzumab can be combined at full dose with standard doses of cisplatin and etoposide. The observed toxicities are consistent with that expected from cisplatin and etoposide except for hyperglycemia, which seems to be dose dependent.

Background/objective: Non-platinum-based chemotherapy is a potential alternative to platinum doublet therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer in selected patients. We determined the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GEMVIN), versus cisplatin/gemcitabine (PG) or cisplatin/vinorelbine (PV), from a government payer perspective., Methods: Results from a randomized trial of GEMVIN versus PG or PV demonstrated no significant difference in global quality of life (primary endpoint) or overall survival between regimens, but superior progression-free survival for platinum-based regimens. A cost analysis was conducted using direct medical costs of treatment, grade 3 or 4 toxicity management, and investigations for the mean number of cycles per study arm. Costs were calculated using Canadian dollars in 2005, and then in 2013 after drug patent expiry., Results: In 2005, GEMVIN was the most expensive regimen ($6868), and PV the least expensive ($4650), with an incremental cost of GEMVIN over PV of $2218. Diagnostic and administration costs did not differ significantly among regimens; GEMVIN had the lowest toxicity costs. The principal cost driver in 2005 was the cost of chemotherapy. In 2013, toxicity and administration costs emerged as major drivers; GEMVIN was less costly than PV and PG, (cost savings of $413 over PV)., Conclusion: Despite similar outcomes, GEMVIN was more expensive than PV or PG in 2005 because of higher chemotherapy costs. By 2013, after chemotherapy drug patent expiry, GEMVIN became the least costly regimen. Economic considerations in oncology change over time, and should be revisited in policy decisions based on cost., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We undertook this analysis of KRAS mutation in four trials of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) versus observation (OBS) to clarify the prognostic/predictive roles of KRAS in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: KRAS mutation was determined in blinded fashion. Exploratory analyses were performed to characterize relationships between mutation status and subtype and survival outcomes using a multivariable Cox model., Results: Among 1,543 patients (763 OBS, 780 ACT), 300 had KRAS mutations (codon 12, n = 275; codon 13, n = 24; codon 14, n = 1). In OBS patients, there was no prognostic difference for overall survival for codon-12 (mutation v wild type [WT] hazard ratio [HR] = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.40) or codon-13 (HR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.47 to 2.17) mutations. No significant benefit from ACT was observed for WT-KRAS (ACT v OBS HR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.04; P = .15) or codon-12 mutations (HR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.35; P = .77); with codon-13 mutations, ACT was deleterious (HR = 5.78; 95% CI, 2.06 to 16.2; P < .001; interaction P = .002). There was no prognostic effect for specific codon-12 amino acid substitution. The effect of ACT was variable among patients with codon-12 mutations: G12A or G12R (HR = 0.66; P = .48), G12C or G12V (HR = 0.94; P = .77) and G12D or G12S (HR = 1.39; P = .48; comparison of four HRs, including WT, interaction P = .76). OBS patients with KRAS-mutated tumors were more likely to develop second primary cancers (HR = 2.76, 95% CI, 1.34 to 5.70; P = .005) but not ACT patients (HR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.25 to 1.75; P = .40; interaction, P = .02)., Conclusion: KRAS mutation status is not significantly prognostic. The potential interaction in patients with codon-13 mutations requires validation. At this time, KRAS status cannot be recommended to select patients with NSCLC for ACT.

Introduction: This phase I/IIA study evaluated the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and clinical benefit of pomalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), combined with cisplatin+etoposide chemotherapy, in treatment-naive patients with extensive-stage (ES) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC)., Methods: In this multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation study, patients received 21-day cycles of oral pomalidomide (1, 3, 5, and 4 mg/day) on days 1 to 14, plus cisplatin 25 mg/m and etoposide 100 mg/m administered intravenously on days 1 to 3; the MTD was determined during cycle 1 (standard 3+3 dose-escalation design), followed by a five-cycle extension phase., Results: Twenty-two patients with ES SCLC, with a median age of 64.5 years received one or more doses of the study medication. Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 4 cerebral ischemia and grade 5 sepsis (1-mg cohort), grade 4 transient ischemic attack (5-mg cohort), and grade 5 neutropenic infection (5-mg cohort). The MTD for pomalidomide was 4 mg/day. In the MTD phase, the most common pomalidomide-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (72.7%), nausea (45.5%), and neutropenia (40.9%); 31.8% of patients experienced pomalidomide-related serious AEs and 40.9% cisplatin/etoposide-related serious AEs. Overall response rate was 31.8% (7 of 22); these were partial responses. Stable disease and progressive disease occurred in four patients (18.2%) each. The median response duration was 12.4 weeks. Median overall survival was 49.6 weeks., Conclusions: Pomalidomide at the MTD of 4 mg/day plus standard cisplatin+etoposide seems safe in treatment-naive patients with ES SCLC. However, addition of pomalidomide does not seem to improve the therapeutic index of chemotherapy alone.

Background: We examined how crossover therapy might affect the association between progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: We extracted PFS- and OS-hazard ratios (HRs) in phase III trials of molecular-targeted agents for advanced NSCLC. Their relationship was modeled in a linear function with the coefficient of determination (R-squared) to assess the correlation between PFS and OS., Results: Thirty-four trials with 35 pairs for the investigational and reference arms were identified (24,158 patients). Overall, there was little correlation between PFS- and OS-HRs (R-squared = 0.14), suggesting PFS-HR could account only for 14% of variation in OS-HR. The median proportion of crossover therapy per trial was 20%. If patients seldom crossed over (none or <1%), the association between PFS- and OS-HRs was strong (R-squared = 0.69). When the proportion of crossover was ≥1%, however, R-squared declined considerably (≥1% to <20% crossover, R-squared = 0.27; ≥20% to <40%, R-squared = 0.06; and ≥40%, R-squared = 0.27)., Conclusions: A PFS advantage seldom is associated with an OS advantage any longer. Our analysis suggests this is due to a high level of crossover now that an increasing number of active agents are available for NSCLC., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of aflibercept (ziv-aflibercept), a recombinant human fusion protein targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway, with or without docetaxel in platinum-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer., Patients and Methods: In this international, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial, 913 patients were randomly assigned to (ziv-)aflibercept 6 mg/kg intravenous (IV; n = 456) or IV placebo (n = 457), both administered every 3 weeks and in combination with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Other efficacy outcomes, safety, and immunogenicity were also assessed., Results: Patient characteristics were balanced between arms; 12.3% of patients had received prior bevacizumab. (Ziv-)Aflibercept did not improve OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.17; stratified log-rank P = .90). The median OS was 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.6 months) for (ziv-)aflibercept and 10.4 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.9 months) for placebo. In exploratory analyses, median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.6 months) for (ziv-)aflibercept versus 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 4.3 months) for placebo (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94; P = .0035); overall response rate was 23.3% of evaluable patients (95% CI, 19.1% to 27.4%) in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm versus 8.9% (95% CI, 6.1% to 11.6%; P < .001) in the placebo arm. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurring more frequently in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm versus the placebo arm were neutropenia (28.0% v 21.1%, respectively), fatigue (11.1% v 4.2%, respectively), stomatitis (8.8% v 0.7%, respectively), and hypertension (7.3% v 0.9%, respectively)., Conclusion: The addition of (ziv-)aflibercept to standard docetaxel therapy did not improve OS. In exploratory analyses, secondary efficacy end points did seem to be improved in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm. The study regimen was associated with increased toxicities, consistent with known anti-VEGF and chemotherapy-induced events.

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) is known to improve survival in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Herein, we describe chemotherapy regimens used, dose modifications, survival, and treatment-related toxicity in the general population., Methods: All cases of non-small cell lung cancer diagnosed in Ontario in the period 2004-2006 who underwent surgical resection (n = 3354) were identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry in this population-based retrospective cohort study. We linked electronic records of treatment to the registry to identify all cases treated with ACT (n = 1032) and describe drugs, regimens, and dosages delivered. As a proxy measure of ACT-related toxicity, we evaluated deaths and hospitalizations within 16 weeks of starting ACT. Factors associated with dose modification were evaluated by logistic regression. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to describe associations between patient-, disease-, and treatment-related factors and survival., Results: ACT regimens were identified for 584 of 1032 ACT cases. Almost all cases included cisplatin- or carboplatin-based regimens (478/584, 82%, and 99/584, 17%, respectively). The most common regimen was a vinroelbine/cisplatin doublet (412/584, 71%); 64% of these cases had a dose reduction or omission. Dose modification was not associated with inferior survival on multivariate analysis. Twelve percent of all ACT cases were admitted to hospital within 16 weeks of starting ACT, and there was a 1.6% death rate potentially attributable to ACT. Survival of all ACT cases was comparable with outcomes reported in clinical trials., Conclusions: ACT regimens used, toxicity, and survival outcomes in the general population are comparable with those reported in clinical trials. Dose modifications used in clinical practice are not associated with inferior survival.

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of concurrent pemetrexed/cisplatin/thoracic radiotherapy followed by consolidation pemetrexed/cisplatin for unresectable Stage IIIA/B non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods and Materials: Eligible patients with <5% weight loss and good performance status received two cycles of pemetrexed (300, 400, or 500 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 22 for Dose Levels 1, 2, and 3/4, respectively) and cisplatin (25 mg/m(2) Days 1-3 for Dose Levels 1-3; 20 mg/m(2) Days 1-5 for Dose Level 4) concurrent with thoracic radiation (61-66 Gy in 31-35 fractions). Consolidation consisted of two cycles of pemetrexed/cisplatin (500 mg/m(2), 75 mg/m(2)) 21 days apart, after concurrent therapy., Results: Between January 2006 and October 2007, 16 patients entered the study. Median follow-up was 17.2 months. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Median radiation dose was 64 Gy (range, 45-66 Gy). Rates of significant Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity were 38% and 7%, respectively. One patient experienced Grade 3 acute esophagitis, and 2 experienced late (Grade 3) esophageal stricture, successfully managed with dilation. One patient experienced Grade 3 pneumonitis. The overall response rate was 88%. One-year overall survival was 81%., Conclusions: Full systemic dose pemetrexed seems to be safe with full-dose cisplatin and thoracic radiation in Stage IIIA/B NSCLC. Pemetrexed is the first third-generation cytotoxic agent tolerable at full dose in this setting. A Phase II study evaluating Dose Level 4 is ongoing., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Recently, histology has emerged as a predictive factor for pemetrexed efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These analyses evaluate whether the differential efficacy of pemetrexed by NSCLC histology is reproducible and consistent across three registration studies of different lines of therapy (first-line/second-line and maintenance settings)., Methods: The reported studies for patients with advanced NSCLC were pemetrexed versus docetaxel in previously treated patients (N = 571), cisplatin plus pemetrexed versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients (N = 1725), and maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care (N = 663). Cox models of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were used to test for a significant treatment-by-histology interaction (THI). A significant THI indicates that the efficacy benefit for pemetrexed relative to the control arm is greater in patients with nonsquamous histology than in those with squamous histology. Subsequent Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios for OS and PFS according to histology., Results: Histology was well balanced between treatment arms in each study. Across all three studies, no clinically relevant differences were observed for the safety profile of pemetrexed among histologic groups. THIs were statistically significant in all three studies for OS (p = 0.001, 0.002, and 0.033, respectively) and PFS (p = 0.004, 0.002, and 0.036, respectively)., Conclusions: These analyses demonstrate a statistically significant interaction between treatment effect and NSCLC histology, indicating superior efficacy of pemetrexed in nonsquamous patients compared with other standard treatment options. Thus, histology is consistently predictive of the improved efficacy of pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

Background: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib sensitizes tumor cells to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis. In preclinical non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) models, p53-dependent growth arrest after bortezomib treatment resulted in reduced cytotoxicity if bortezomib preceded docetaxel. The reverse sequence of docetaxel before bortezomib was associated with increased apoptosis, cleavage of caspase-3 and PARP (poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase), and reduction in Bcl-2. A prospective randomized phase II trial of concurrent versus sequential docetaxel and bortezomib was conducted to assess whether administration sequence resulted in measurable clinical differences., Patients and Methods: Previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to concurrent (CON) or sequential (SEQ) docetaxel (75 mg/m² intravenous [I.V.]) followed by bortezomib, every 3 weeks. In the CON arm, bortezomib (1.6 mg/m² I.V.) was given on days 1 and 8, and in the SEQ arm, it was given on days 2 and 8. Previous erlotinib as well as treated or controlled brain metastases were allowed. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (RR); progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were secondary endpoints., Results: Eighty-one patients were randomized (40 CON and 41 SEQ). Grade 3+ toxicities were mostly due to myelosuppression. One patient each had grade 4 hyponatremia and syncope. Toxicities were similar between the arms. There was 1 treatment-related death in the SEQ arm. There were 8 partial responders, 4 in each arm, for an overall RR of 10%. Disease control rate was similar in both arms (50% vs. 49%). Median PFS was 12 weeks in the CON arm and 11 weeks in the SEQ arm. Median OS times in the CON and SEQ arms were 13.3 and 10.5 months, respectively., Conclusion: Docetaxel plus bortezomib given sequentially or concurrently has similar RR and PFS. Median survival in the SEQ arm exceeds published survival estimates for either agent alone or in combination. Any further studies in this population would require molecular characterization of a phenotype most likely to benefit from proteasome inhibitor therapy.

Purpose: Patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations may have a more favorable prognosis and greater response to chemotherapy. The effect of EGFR mutation and gene copy on patients with early-stage non-small cell lung carcinoma receiving adjuvant chemotherapy has not been reported., Patients and Methods: Tumor samples from NCIC Clinical Trials Group JBR.10, an adjuvant trial of vinorelbine/cisplatin adjuvant chemotherapy [ACT] versus observation (OBS), were analyzed for EGFR mutation by multiple sensitive methods and copy number by fluorescent in situ hybridization. Their prognostic and predictive roles were explored in correlation with survival., Results: Mutation results were available in 221 OBS and 215 ACT and fluorescent in situ hybridization results in 159 OBS and 163 ACT patients. Mutations were identified in 43 (27 OBS and 16 ACT) patients (36 sensitizing exon 19 deletions or L858R mutations). Compared with wild-type, sensitizing mutations were not significantly prognostic in OBS patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-1.63, p = 0.53). Although the presence of sensitizing mutations resulted in relatively greater benefit in ACT patients (HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.11-1.70, p = 0.22) compared with wild-type patients (HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.58-1.06, p = 0.12), this quantitative difference was not significant (interaction p = 0.50). Similarly, high EGFR copy was neither significantly prognostic nor predictive, although quantitatively it was associated with greater benefit from ACT., Conclusions: Trends toward longer survival and a greater benefit from chemotherapy were observed in patients with exon 19/21 mutations and high EGFR copy, although the differences were not statistically significant. The interpretation of the results was limited by the low EGFR mutation rate in this study of mainly white patients.

Purpose: The JBR.10 trial demonstrated benefit from adjuvant cisplatin/vinorelbine (ACT) in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that expression profiling may identify stage-independent subgroups who might benefit from ACT., Patients and Methods: Gene expression profiling was conducted on mRNA from 133 frozen JBR.10 tumor samples (62 observation [OBS], 71 ACT). The minimum gene set that was selected for the greatest separation of good and poor prognosis patient subgroups in OBS patients was identified. The prognostic value of this gene signature was tested in four independent published microarray data sets and by quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR)., Results: A 15-gene signature separated OBS patients into high-risk and low-risk subgroups with significantly different survival (hazard ratio [HR], 15.02; 95% CI, 5.12 to 44.04; P < .001; stage I HR, 13.31; P < .001; stage II HR, 13.47; P < .001). The prognostic effect was verified in the same 62 OBS patients where gene expression was assessed by qPCR. Furthermore, it was validated consistently in four separate microarray data sets (total 356 stage IB to II patients without adjuvant treatment) and additional JBR.10 OBS patients by qPCR (n = 19). The signature was also predictive of improved survival after ACT in JBR.10 high-risk patients (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.63; P = .0005), but not in low-risk patients (HR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.22 to 11.06; P = .0133; interaction P < .001). Significant interaction between risk groups and ACT was verified by qPCR., Conclusion: This 15-gene expression signature is an independent prognostic marker in early-stage, completely resected NSCLC, and to our knowledge, is the first signature that has demonstrated the potential to select patients with stage IB to II NSCLC most likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin/vinorelbine.

Introduction: Aflibercept (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] trap), a recombinant fusion protein, blocks the activity of VEGF-A and placental growth factor and has demonstrated activity in pretreated patients with lung cancer in a phase I trial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous aflibercept in patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma., Methods: An open-label, single arm, multicenter trial was conducted, with the primary end point of response rate (modified RECIST). Additional endpoints included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma were eligible. Aflibercept 4.0 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks was administered until progression of disease or intolerable toxicity., Results: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled; 89 were evaluable for response. Median age was 60 years, 41% were men with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1/2 in 35/55/9% of patients. The overall response rate was 2.0%, (95% confidence interval, 0.2-7.2%). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 months, and overall was survival 6.2 months. Six- and 12-month survival rates were 54 and 29%, respectively. A median of four cycles was administered (range 1-22). Common grade 3/4 toxicities included dyspnea (21%), hypertension (23%), and proteinuria (10%). Two cases of grade 5 hemoptysis were reported, and one case each of tracheoesophageal fistula, decreased cardiac ejection fraction, cerebral ischemia, and reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy., Conclusions: Aflibercept has minor single agent activity in heavily pretreated lung adenocarcinoma, and is well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities. Further studies evaluating aflibercept in lung cancer, in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted therapies, are ongoing.

Background: Female sex is a favorable prognostic factor in lung cancer. In small-cell lung cancer, women have been shown to experience greater toxicity from chemotherapy, but there are few studies of sex-related toxicity in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: This retrospective analysis evaluated the effect of sex on efficacy, adverse events (AEs), dose intensity (DI), and quality of life (QoL) in three phase III NSCLC trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group; BR.10 (adjuvant chemotherapy), BR.14, and BR.18 (first-line advanced disease). Only patients with National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group data were included, and patients in the BR.10 observation arm were excluded., Results: Of 1,108 patients analyzed, 29% were female. On study entry, women were less likely to be overweight or obese (40% versus 51%, p < 0.0001), more likely to have adenocarcinoma (70% versus 44%, p < 0.0001), and less likely to be anemic at baseline (29% versus 55%, p < 0.0001) or have medical comorbidities. There were no significant differences in response rate to chemotherapy (27% versus 31%, p = 0.44 [excluding BR.10]), grade 3 or 4 AEs, DI, or QoL between sexes, although women reported more nausea and vomiting of any grade (77% versus 66%, p = 0.0004). In multivariate analysis, women had longer progression-free survival than men (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.97, p = 0.02) but not overall survival (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.05, p = 0.17)., Conclusion: Women demonstrate modestly longer progression-free survival than men in chemotherapy-treated NSCLC, with no differences observed in response rates, serious AEs, or QoL.

PURPOSE This phase II/III double-blind study assessed efficacy and safety of cediranib with standard chemotherapy as initial therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve 6) were given every 3 weeks, with daily oral cediranib or placebo at 30 mg (first 45 patients received 45 mg). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary outcome of the phase II interim analysis; phase III would proceed if the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS < or = 0.77 and toxicity were acceptable. Results A total of 296 patients were enrolled, 251 to the 30-mg cohort. The phase II interim analysis demonstrated a significantly higher response rate (RR) for cediranib than for placebo, HR of 0.77 for PFS, no excess hemoptysis, and a similar number of deaths in each arm. The study was halted to review imbalances in assigned causes of death. In the primary phase II analysis (30-mg cohort), the adjusted HR for PFS was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.08) with a higher RR for cediranib than for placebo (38% v 16%; P < .0001). Cediranib patients had more hypertension, hypothyroidism, hand-foot syndrome, and GI toxicity. Hypoalbuminemia, age > or = 65 years, and female sex predicted increased toxicity. Survival update (N = 296) 10 months after study unblinding favored cediranib over placebo (median of 10.5 months v 10.1 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.06; P = .11). Causes of death in the cediranib 30-mg cohort were NSCLC (81%), protocol toxicity +/- NSCLC (13%), and other (6%); for the placebo group, they were 98%, 0%, and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSION The addition of cediranib to carboplatin/paclitaxel results in improved response and PFS, but does not appear tolerable at a 30-mg dose. Consequently, the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group and the Australasian Lung Cancer Trials Group initiated a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of cediranib 20 mg with carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced NSCLC.

PURPOSE Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (ACT) is now an accepted standard for completely resected stage II and III A non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Long-term follow-up is important to document persistent benefit and late toxicity. We report here updated overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) data. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with completely resected stage IB (T2N0, n = 219) or II (T1-2N1, n = 263) NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive 4 cycles of vinorelbine/cisplatin or observation. All efficacy analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results Median follow-up was 9.3 years (range, 5.8 to 13.8; 33 lost to follow-up); there were 271 deaths in 482 randomly assigned patients. ACT continues to show a benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99; P = .04). There was a trend for interaction with disease stage (P = .09; HR for stage II, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.92; P = .01; stage IB, HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.52; P = .87). ACT resulted in significantly prolonged DSS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.97; P = .03). Observation was associated with significantly higher risk of death from lung cancer (P = .02), with no difference in rates of death from other causes or second primary malignancies between the arms. CONCLUSION Prolonged follow-up of patients from the JBR.10 trial continues to show a benefit in survival for adjuvant chemotherapy. This benefit appears to be confined to N1 patients. There was no increase in death from other causes in the chemotherapy arm.

Purpose: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group JBR.10 demonstrated that adjuvant vinorelbine and cisplatin after resection of stage IB-II non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improved relapse-free and overall survival. However, many patients either are not referred for chemotherapy or decline treatment. To aid in treatment decision making, quality-adjusted survival estimates of the JBR.10 trial were derived using a quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis., Methods: Survival curves for treatment (N = 242) and observation groups (N = 240) were partitioned into three health states: time with >or= grade 2 (early or late) chemotherapy-related toxicity (TOX), time in relapse (REL), and time without toxicity or relapse (TWiST). Q-TWiST = u(TOX) x TOX + u(TWiST) x TWIST + u(REL) x REL, where weights u(TOX), u(TWIST), and u(REL) range from 0 to 1. Threshold utility analysis was performed to test the sensitivity of the results to changes in the weights. Weights were derived in an exploratory fashion using different methods. Methods included use of arbitrary values, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) quality-of-life data prospectively collected in JBR.10 (global assessment questions and symptom-based questions), and lastly weights European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions questionnaire collected from early-stage NSCLC (nontrial) patients after resection with discounting for toxicity and relapse. The alpha level was .05., Results: Threshold utility analysis revealed that adjuvant chemotherapy was preferred for all possible weight values for relapse and toxicity (u(REL), u(TOX)), although the result was not always statistically significant. The adjuvant chemotherapy group had better Q-TWiST in the range of 5 to 6 additional months, which was statistically significant using all methods., Conclusion: Adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage NSCLC improves quality-adjusted survival despite chemotherapy toxicity.

Introduction: GTI-2040, an antisense oligonucleotide, targets the ribonucleotide reductase R2 subunit, critical for DNA synthesis. This study determined the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of docetaxel plus GTI-2040, toxicity, and response rate in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Advanced solid tumor patients, preferably with platinum-treated NSCLC, performance status 0 to 2, no symptomatic central nervous system metastases, adequate organ and bone marrow function, and >or=1 prior chemotherapy regimen were treated with escalating doses of GTI-2040 given by 14-day continuous intravenous infusion (CVI) plus docetaxel every 21 days., Results: Twenty-nine patients were treated, (24 NSCLC, 3 hormone-refractory prostate cancer, 1 head and neck, and 1 small cell lung cancer). GTI-2040 5 mg/kg as CVI for 14 days plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) intravenously every 21days was determined as the RP2D. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. Two patients at RP2D developed grade 4/5 febrile neutropenia. One prostate specific antigen response was seen in phase I, but no objective tumor responses in the NSCLC patients. Median time to progression was 3.4 months, 3.2 months in the NSCLC patients treated at RP2D., Conclusions: Activity of the combination at RP2D, GTI-2040 5 mg/kg/d x 14 days by CVI plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) does not seem superior to docetaxel alone in previously treated NSCLC.

Background: Results from phase II studies in patients with stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer with ipsilateral mediastinal nodal metastases (N2) have shown the feasibility of resection after concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy with promising rates of survival. We therefore did this phase III trial to compare concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by resection with standard concurrent chemotherapy and definitive radiotherapy without resection., Methods: Patients with stage T1-3pN2M0 non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to concurrent induction chemotherapy (two cycles of cisplatin [50 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 29, and 36] and etoposide [50 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 and 29-33]) plus radiotherapy (45 Gy) in multiple academic and community hospitals. If no progression, patients in group 1 underwent resection and those in group 2 continued radiotherapy uninterrupted up to 61 Gy. Two additional cycles of cisplatin and etoposide were given in both groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00002550., Findings: 202 patients (median age 59 years, range 31-77) were assigned to group 1 and 194 (61 years, 32-78) to group 2. Median OS was 23.6 months (IQR 9.0-not reached) in group 1 versus 22.2 months (9.4-52.7) in group 2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87 [0.70-1.10]; p=0.24). Number of patients alive at 5 years was 37 (point estimate 27%) in group 1 and 24 (point estimate 20%) in group 2 (odds ratio 0.63 [0.36-1.10]; p=0.10). With N0 status at thoracotomy, the median OS was 34.4 months (IQR 15.7-not reached; 19 [point estimate 41%] patients alive at 5 years). Progression-free survival (PFS) was better in group 1 than in group 2, median 12.8 months (5.3-42.2) vs 10.5 months (4.8-20.6), HR 0.77 [0.62-0.96]; p=0.017); the number of patients without disease progression at 5 years was 32 (point estimate 22%) versus 13 (point estimate 11%), respectively. Neutropenia and oesophagitis were the main grade 3 or 4 toxicities associated with chemotherapy plus radiotherapy in group 1 (77 [38%] and 20 [10%], respectively) and group 2 (80 [41%] and 44 [23%], respectively). In group 1, 16 (8%) deaths were treatment related versus four (2%) in group 2. In an exploratory analysis, OS was improved for patients who underwent lobectomy, but not pneumonectomy, versus chemotherapy plus radiotherapy., Interpretation: Chemotherapy plus radiotherapy with or without resection (preferably lobectomy) are options for patients with stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer., Funding: National Cancer Institute, Canadian Cancer Society, and National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Introduction: This phase 2 study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of erlotinib alone and with bortezomib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed relapsed or refractory stage IIIb/IV NSCLC were randomized (1:1; stratified by baseline histology, smoking history, sex) to receive erlotinib 150 mg/d alone (arm A; n = 25) or in combination with bortezomib 1.6 mg/m2, days 1 and 8 (arm B; n = 25) in 21-day cycles. Responses were assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Tumor samples were evaluated for mutations predicting response. Six additional patients received the combination in a prior dose deescalation stage and were included in safety analyses., Results: Response rates were 16% in arm A and 9% in arm B; disease control rates were 52 and 45%, respectively. The study was halted at the planned interim analysis due to insufficient clinical activity in arm B. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.7 and 7.3 months in arm A, and 1.3 and 8.5 months in arm B. Six-month survival rates were 56.0% in both arms; 12-month rates were 40 and 30% in arms A and B, respectively. Response rate to erlotinib+/-bortezomib was significantly higher in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (50 versus 9% for wild type). The most common treatment-related grade > or =3 adverse event was skin rash (three patients in each treatment group)., Conclusion: Insufficient activity was seen with erlotinib plus bortezomib in patients with relapsed/refractory advanced NSCLC to warrant a phase 3 study of the combination.

Background: Patients with cancer, including lung cancer are at an increased risk for venous thromboembolism and frequently are anticoagulated. Due to concerns of bleeding and drug-drug interactions, many clinical trials suggest the use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) rather than warfarin (coumadin) for patients requiring anticoagulation. We sought to evaluate, in a retrospective analysis, whether these recommendations were appropriate., Material/methods: A pooled analysis of three lung cancer trials conducted by the NCIC Clinical Trials Group was performed to evaluate the risk of bleeding in patients receiving warfarin or LMWH; concomitant usage of nonsteroidal antinflammatories or aspirin. The Mantel-Haentzel test stratified by treatment group was used to analyze the prevalence of bleeding (all and > or =grade 3) according to LMWH, warfarin or nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs usage. Logistic regression was used to adjust for baseline characteristics including age, sex, performance status, creatinine, platelets., Results: Although bleeding was reported in a quarter of patients, only 2% experienced severe bleeding, with rates similar across the trials. In univariate analyses the risk of bleeding seemed higher with LMWH or warfarin usage, history of bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and increased age. However, in adjusted analyses only warfarin use was a significant risk factor (p = 0.073)., Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis, warfarin seemed to increase the risk of bleeding in lung cancer patients enrolled in clinical trials. Current recommendations in many clinical trials to preferentially use LMWH seem appropriate.

Introduction: Cediranib, a potent vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, demonstrated broad pre-clinical anti-tumour activity. This study evaluated escalating cediranib doses with combination chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients., Methods: Patients received cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle, and daily oral cediranib at either 30 mg or 45 mg. Pharmacokinetics of all drugs were analysed, and response was assessed by RECIST., Results: Fifteen patients were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during cycle 1. Fatigue, nausea, diarrhoea, anorexia and granulocytopaenia were common; hypertension was manageable. No grade 3/4 bleeding occurred. At 45 mg/d, fatigue, diarrhoea and thrombocytopaenia were increased; and headache, hoarseness and grade 2 hand-foot syndrome were observed. Cediranib had no effect on cisplatin elimination, but clearance of gemcitabine is significantly reduced in the presence of cediranib (p>0.02). Central review confirmed responses in four of 15 enrolled patients (26.7%, 95% CI 7.8-55%) and four of 12 evaluable patients (33.3%, 95% CI 9.9-65%)., Conclusion: Cediranib at 30 mg daily can be combined with standard doses of cisplatin/gemcitabine with encouraging anti-tumour activity, and is the recommended phase III dose. Toxicity is increased, but is predictable and manageable.

Background: Recent studies of pemetrexed have identified a predictive role for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) histology. We further reviewed the differential efficacy of pemetrexed according to histology in two large, phase III NSCLC trials., Methods: One study tested pemetrexed versus docetaxel in previously treated patients (n = 571) and the other tested cisplatin plus pemetrexed versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients (n = 1,725) with advanced NSCLC. Cox proportional hazard models were used to test for covariate-adjusted treatment-by-histology interactions (THIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). For each histologic subgroup, the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate unadjusted within-arm medians, and Cox models were used to estimate covariate-adjusted between-arm hazard ratios (HRs)., Results: In both studies, treatment arms were well balanced for histology. THIs were statistically significant (p < .005) for both OS and PFS. Nonsquamous patients treated with pemetrexed-based therapy experienced longer survival than the comparators (HR, 0.78 and 0.84, respectively), whereas squamous patients had shorter survival (HR, 1.56 and 1.23, respectively). Whereas the efficacy of pemetrexed regimens differed according to histology, it did not differ for docetaxel or for cisplatin plus gemcitabine. Pemetrexed was well tolerated across histologic groups., Conclusions: The consistency of these results across studies confirms the predictive effect of histology for pemetrexed and the survival advantage for pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous histology. These analyses suggest pemetrexed should not be recommended for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma, but, because of efficacy and safety advantages, pemetrexed may be preferable to other agents for treatment of patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

Purpose: Adjuvant chemotherapy for early stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is now the standard of care, but there is little information regarding its impact on quality of life (QOL). We report the QOL results of JBR.10, a North American, intergroup, randomized trial of adjuvant cisplatin and vinorelbine compared with observation in patients who have completely resected, stages IB to II NSCLC., Patients and Methods: QOL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and a trial-specific checklist at baseline and at weeks 5 and 9 for those who received chemotherapy and at follow-up months 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36. A 10-point change in QOL scores from baseline was considered clinically significant., Results: Four hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned on JBR.10. A total of 173 patients (82% of the expected) in the observation arm and 186 (85% of expected) in the chemotherapy arm completed baseline QOL assessments. The two groups were comparable, with low global QOL scores and significant symptom burden, especially pain and fatigue, after thoracotomy. Changes in QOL during chemotherapy were relatively modest; fatigue, nausea, and vomiting worsened, but there was a reduction in pain and no change in global QOL. Patients in the observation arm showed considerable improvements in QOL by 3 months. QOL, except for symptoms of sensory neuropathy and hearing loss, in those treated with chemotherapy returned to baseline by 9 months., Conclusion: The findings of this trial indicate that the negative effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on QOL appear to be temporary, and that improvements (with a return to baseline function) are likely in most patients.

The promise of effective targeted therapy for lung cancer requires rigorous identification of potential targets combined with intensive discovery and development efforts aimed at developing effective "drugs" for these targets. We now recognize that getting the right drug to the right target in the right patient is more complicated than one could have imagined a decade ago. As knowledge of targets and development of agents have proliferated and advanced, so too have data demonstrating the biologic heterogeneity of tumors. The finding that lung cancers are genetically diverse and can exhibit several pathways of resistance in response to targeted agents makes the prospect for curative therapy more daunting. It is becoming increasingly clear that single-agent treatment will be the exception rather than the rule. This information raises important new questions about the development and assessment of novel agents in lung cancer treatment: (1) How do we identify the most important drug targets for tumor initiation and maintenance? (2) What is the best way to assess drug candidates that may only be relevant in a small fraction of patients? (3) What models do we use to predict clinical response and identify effective combinations? And (4) how do we bring combination regimens to the clinic, particularly when the agents are not yet approved individually and may be under development from different companies? The Fifth Cambridge Conference on Novel Agents in the Treatment of Lung Cancer was held in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on October 1-2, 2007, to discuss these questions by reviewing recent progress in the field and advancing recommendations for research and patient care. New information, conclusions, and recommendations considered significant for the field by the program faculty are summarized here and presented at greater length in the individual articles and accompanying discussions that comprise the full conference proceedings. A CME activity based on this summary is also available at www.informedicalcme.com/cme.

Purpose: AZD2171 is a potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors that showed broad antitumor activity in preclinical models. Doses of up to 45 mg/d of AZD2171 are tolerable when administered alone. This study evaluated escalating doses of AZD2171 in combination with standard chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients received carboplatin targeted to an area under the concentration time curve of 6 mg . min/mL and paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), both on day 1 of a 3-week cycle; daily oral AZD2171 at either 30 mg or 45 mg commenced day 2 of cycle 1. Pharmacokinetics of all drugs were performed, and tumor response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)., Results: Twenty patients were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during cycle 1 at either dose. Fatigue, diarrhea, anorexia, and granulocytopenia were common; hypertension was manageable with a treatment algorithm designed for this protocol. No clinically significant drug-related bleeding was observed. At 45 mg/d, fatigue and diarrhea were increased, and headache and hoarseness were observed. Paclitaxel clearance decreased during cycle 2, but no other significant pharmacokinetic interactions were observed. After radiology review, confirmed responses were observed in nine patients (response rate, 45%; 95% CI, 23% to 68%); all but one enrolled patient showed evidence of tumor shrinkage, some with cavitation., Conclusion: AZD2171 can be combined with standard doses of carboplatin/paclitaxel with encouraging antitumor activity. Toxicity is increased, but predictable and manageable.

After failure of first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, many patients remain candidates to receive further antitumor treatment. To guide clinical management of these patients and to suggest priorities for clinical research, an International Panel of Experts met in Naples (Italy) in April 2007. Results and evidence-based conclusions are presented in this article. Single-agent chemotherapy with docetaxel or pemetrexed is the recommended option for unselected patients with performance status 0 to 2 who are candidates for second-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Docetaxel has demonstrated superiority compared with best supportive care. Pemetrexed has been shown to be noninferior to docetaxel, with a more favorable toxicity profile. Erlotinib is effective in pretreated patients, and can be given second-line in patients not suitable or intolerant to chemotherapy, and in all patients as third-line treatment after failure of second-line chemotherapy. Gefitinib failed to show superiority to placebo as second- or third-line treatment, but it has been shown to be noninferior to docetaxel. In selected patients such as lifetime nonsmokers or those of East-Asian ethnicity, erlotinib, or gefitinib (where licensed) may be considered as second-line treatment even if they are fit for chemotherapy. Best supportive care in addition to active treatment remains important for all patients, but may be the exclusive option for patients unsuitable for more aggressive therapy. Further research is mandatory, to find better treatments, and to identify clinical and molecular predictive markers of efficacy, both for chemotherapy and for novel biologic agents.

Purpose: This study analyzed patients enrolled in two large, prospectively randomized trials of systemic chemotherapy (adjuvant/palliative setting) for non-small-cell lung Cancer (NSCLC). The main objective was to determine if age and/or the burden of chronic medical conditions (comorbidity) are independent predictors of survival, treatment delivery, and toxicity., Patients and Methods: Baseline comorbid conditions were scored using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), a validated measure of patient comorbidity that is weighted according to the influence of comorbidity on overall mortality. The CCI score (CCIS) was correlated with demographic data,(ie, age, sex, race), performance status (PS), histology, cancer stage, patient weight, hemoglobin, alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, outcomes of chemotherapy delivery (ie, type, total dose, and dose intensity), survival, and response., Results: A total of 1,255 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 61 years (range, 34 to 89 years); 34% of patients were elderly (at least 65 years of age); and 31% had comorbid conditions at randomization. Twenty-five percent of patients had a CCIS of 1, whereas 6% had a CCIS of 2 or greater. Elderly patients were more likely to have a CCIS equal to or greater than 1 compared with younger patients (42% v 26%; P < .0001), as were male patients (35% v 21%; P < .0001) and patients with squamous histology (36% v 29%; P = .001). Although age did not influence overall survival, the CCIS appeared prognostic (CCIS 1 v 0; hazard ratio 1.28; 95%CI, 1.09 to 1.5; P = .003)., Conclusion: In these large, randomized trials, the presence of comorbid conditions (CCIS > or = 1), rather than age more than 65 years, was associated with poorer survival.