Search

Background: Radiotherapy might augment systemic antitumoral responses to immunotherapy. In the PEMBRO-RT (phase 2) and MDACC (phase 1/2) trials, patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly allocated immunotherapy (pembrolizumab) with or without radiotherapy. When the trials were analysed individually, a potential benefit was noted in the combination treatment arm. However, owing to the small sample size of each trial, differences in response rates and outcomes were not statistically significant but remained clinically notable. We therefore did a pooled analysis to infer whether radiotherapy improves responses to immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer., Methods: Inclusion criteria for the PEMBRO-RT and MDACC trials were patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and at least one unirradiated lesion to monitor for out-of-field response. In the PEMBRO-RT trial, patients had previously received chemotherapy, whereas in the MDACC trial, patients could be either previously treated or newly diagnosed. Patients in both trials were immunotherapy-naive. In the PEMBRO-RT trial, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) and stratified by smoking status (<10 vs ≥10 pack-years). In the MDACC trial, patients were entered into one of two cohorts based on radiotherapy schedule feasibility and randomly assigned (1:1). Because of the nature of the intervention in the combination treatment arm, blinding to radiotherapy was not feasible in either trial. Pembrolizumab was administered intravenously (200 mg every 3 weeks) with or without radiotherapy in both trials. In the PEMBRO-RT trial, the first dose of pembrolizumab was given sequentially less than 1 week after the last dose of radiotherapy (24 Gy in three fractions), whereas in the MDACC trial, pembrolizumab was given concurrently with the first dose of radiotherapy (50 Gy in four fractions or 45 Gy in 15 fractions). Only unirradiated lesions were measured for response. The endpoints for this pooled analysis were best out-of-field (abscopal) response rate (ARR), best abscopal disease control rate (ACR), ARR at 12 weeks, ACR at 12 weeks, progression-free survival, and overall survival. The intention-to-treat populations from both trials were included in analyses. The PEMBRO-RT trial (NCT02492568) and the MDACC trial (NCT02444741) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov., Findings: Overall, 148 patients were included in the pooled analysis, 76 of whom had been assigned pembrolizumab and 72 who had been assigned pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy. Median follow-up for all patients was 33 months (IQR 32·4-33·6). 124 (84%) of 148 patients had non-squamous histological features and 111 (75%) had previously received chemotherapy. Baseline variables did not differ between treatment groups, including PD-L1 status and metastatic disease volume. The most frequently irradiated sites were lung metastases (28 of 72 [39%]), intrathoracic lymph nodes (15 of 72 [21%]), and lung primary disease (12 of 72 [17%]). Best ARR was 19·7% (15 of 76) with pembrolizumab versus 41·7% (30 of 72) with pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy (odds ratio [OR] 2·96, 95% CI 1·42-6·20; p=0·0039), and best ACR was 43·4% (33 of 76) with pembrolizumab versus 65·3% (47 of 72) with pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy (2·51, 1·28-4·91; p=0·0071). Median progression-free survival was 4·4 months (IQR 2·9-5·9) with pembrolizumab alone versus 9·0 months (6·8-11·2) with pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-0·99; p=0·045), and median overall survival was 8·7 months (6·4-11·0) with pembrolizumab versus 19·2 months (14·6-23·8) with pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy (0·67, 0·54-0·84; p=0·0004). No new safety concerns were noted in the pooled analysis., Interpretation: Adding radiotherapy to pembrolizumab immunotherapy significantly increased responses and outcomes in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. These results warrant validation in a randomised phase 3 trial., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To identify an MTD of olaparib, a PARP inhibitor, in combination with loco-regional radiotherapy with/without cisplatin for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Olaparib dose was escalated in two groups: radiotherapy (66 Gy/24 fractions in 2.75 Gy/fraction) with and without daily cisplatin (6 mg/m 2 ), using time-to-event continual reassessment method with a 1-year dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) period. The highest dose level with a DLT probability <15% was defined as MTD. Poly ADP-ribose (PAR) inhibition and radiation-induced PAR-ribosylation (PARylation) were determined in peripheral blood mononuclear cells., Results: Twenty-eight patients with loco-regional or oligometastatic disease (39%) were treated: 11 at olaparib 25 mg twice daily and 17 at 25 mg once daily. The lowest dose level with cisplatin was above the MTD due to hematologic and late esophageal DLT. The MTD without cisplatin was olaparib 25 mg once daily. At a latency of 1-2.8 years, severe pulmonary adverse events (AE) were observed in 5 patients across all dose levels, resulting in 18% grade 5 pulmonary AEs. Exploratory analyses indicate an association with the radiation dose to the lungs. At the MTD, olaparib reduced PAR levels by more than 95% and abolished radiation-induced PARylation. Median follow-up of survivors was 4.1 years. Two-year loco-regional control was 84%, median overall survival in patients with locally advanced NSCLC was 28 months., Conclusions: Combined mildly hypofractionated radiotherapy and low-dose daily cisplatin and olaparib was not tolerable due to esophageal and hematologic toxicity. Severe pulmonary toxicity was observed as well, even without cisplatin. More conformal radiotherapy schedules with improved pulmonary and esophageal sparing should be explored., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early-stage inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients delivers high doses that require high-precision treatment. Typically, image guidance is used to minimize day-to-day target displacement, but intrafraction position variability is often not corrected. Currently, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is replacing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in many departments because of its shorter delivery time. This study aimed to evaluate whether intrafraction variation in VMAT patients is reduced in comparison with patients treated with IMRT., Methods and Materials: NSCLC patients (197 IMRT and 112 VMAT) treated with a frameless SBRT technique to a prescribed dose of 3 × 18 Gy were evaluated. Image guidance for both techniques was identical: pretreatment cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (CBCTprecorr) for setup correction followed immediately before treatment by postcorrection CBCT (CBCTpostcorr) for verification. Then, after either a noncoplanar IMRT technique or a VMAT technique, a posttreatment (CBCTpostRT) scan was acquired. The CBCTpostRT and CBCTpostcorr scans were then used to evaluate intrafraction motion. Treatment delivery times, systematic (Σ) and random (σ) intrafraction variations, and associated planning target volume (PTV) margins were calculated., Results: The median treatment delivery time was significantly reduced by 20 minutes (range, 32-12 minutes) using VMAT compared with noncoplanar IMRT. Intrafraction tumor motion was significantly larger for IMRT in all directions up to 0.5 mm systematic (Σ) and 0.7 mm random (σ). The required PTV margins for IMRT and VMAT differed by less than 0.3 mm., Conclusion: VMAT-based SBRT for NSCLC was associated with significantly shorter delivery times and correspondingly smaller intrafraction motion compared with noncoplanar IMRT. However, the impact on the required PTV margin was small., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)