Search

Background: Perioperative immunotherapy improves short-term outcomes in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We now report 5-year survival from the NADIM trial to assess its long-term benefit., Methods: NADIM was a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial conducted across 18 hospitals in Spain. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and had histologically or cytologically confirmed, treatment-naive, resectable stage IIIA NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition criteria). The neoadjuvant treatment consisted of three cycles of intravenous paclitaxel (200 mg/m 2 ) and carboplatin (area under the curve 6 mg/mL per min) with nivolumab (360 mg). After surgery, 1 year of adjuvant treatment with intravenous nivolumab monotherapy was administered (240 mg every 2 weeks for 4 months, followed by 480 mg every 4 weeks for 8 months). The primary endpoint was 24-month progression-free survival, with 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival as secondary endpoints, assessed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who received neoadjuvant treatment). Toxicity profile was also assessed as a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03081689) and is complete; this is the final report of the trial., Findings: Between April 26, 2017, and Aug 25, 2018, 51 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 46 comprised the intention-to-treat population (34 [74%] male and 12 [26%] female, median age 63 years [IQR 58-70]). Follow-up was concluded at 60 months (data cutoff July 11, 2023; median follow-up 60·0 months [IQR 60·0-60·0]). 5-year progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 65·0% (95% CI 49·4-76·9), and overall survival was 69·3% (53·7-80·6). Disease progression occurred in 11 (24%) patients; 14 (30%) patients died, including nine (20%) from disease relapse and five (11%) from non-tumour-related causes. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of grade 3 or worse occurred in 14 (30%) of 46 patients during neoadjuvant treatment and in seven (19%) of 37 during adjuvant treatment. The most common grade 3 or worse TRAEs were increased lipase and febrile neutropenia (three [7%] each) during neoadjuvant treatment, and elevated serum lipase (four [7%]) and elevated serum amylase (three [8%]) during adjuvant treatment. Serious TRAEs included elevated serum lipase and neutropenia (one [2%] each) during neoadjuvant treatment, and elevated serum lipase (one [3%]) during adjuvant treatment. No treatment-related surgery delays, deaths, or unexpected long-term toxicities were reported., Interpretation: Perioperative chemoimmunotherapy showed a promising long-term benefit with no concerning safety data, reinforcing its use in resectable stage IIIA NSCLC., Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Spanish Ministry of Science, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, European Union., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MP reports non-financial support (reagents for T-cell receptor sequencing) from ThermoFisher Scientific; grants, consulting fees, and non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, and AstraZeneca; and consulting fees from MSD and Takeda; outside the submitted work. EN reports grants from Roche, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, and Nanostring; consulting fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Qiagen, and Bayer; payment of honoraria from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Sanofi, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, and Qiagen; support for attending meetings or travel from Takeda, MSD, Janssen, and Roche; and participation on advisory boards for Apollomics, Roche, and Pfizer. AI reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Amgen, and Astra Zeneca; payment for expert testimony from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, Takeda, and Pfizer; and participation on advisory boards for Roche and Bristol Myers Squibb. RG-C reports consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. MD reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Takeda. BM reports consulting fees from Astra Zeneca and Amgen; payment or honoraria from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and MSD; and support for attending meetings or travel from MSD and AstraZeneca. MM reports grants from Roche and Astra Zeneca; payment of honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, Pfizer, Helsinn, Cassen, Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Takeda; and support for attending meetings or travel from MSD, Roche, and AstraZeneca. DR-A reports honoraria for lectures from MSD, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Takeda, Lilly, and AstaZeneca; support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, MSD, Novartis, and Sanofi; and participation on advisory boards for Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Regeneron, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, and Lilly. AM-M reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Janssen; payment for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Bristol Myers Squibb, and F. Hoffmann La Roche; support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, Janssen, and Lilly; and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, F. Hoffmann La Roche, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. JdC reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, MSD, Boehringer, Janssen, Lilly, Sanofi, Takeda, Pfizer, and GSK; support for attending meeting or travel from AstraZeneca, MSD, and Roche; participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, MSD, Glaxo, Janssen, and Gilea; and speaker's bureau fees from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Janssen. DG reports payment or honoraria from Astra Zeneca and Bristol Myers Squibb. VC reports consulting fees from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Sanofi, and Amgen; payment or honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, SanofiI, and Amgen; and support for attending meetings or travel from AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, and Takeda. RP reports payment or honoraria from Guardant Health and Pfizer; and support for attending meetings or travel from Merck Sharpe & Dohme; participation on an advisory board for AstraZeneca. AR reports payment or honoraria from Illumina, Health in Code, and ThermoFisher Scientific; support for attending meetings or travel from ThermoFisher Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, and Takeda; and advisory board participation for Takeda. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Loss of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I expression and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) are common events implicated in the primary resistance of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to immunotherapy. However, there is no data on perioperative chemoimmunotherapy (ChIO) efficacy or response mechanisms in the context of HLA class I defects., Methods: Baseline HLA class I tumor status (HLA-deficient (HLA-DEF) or HLA-proficient (HLA-PRO)) was determined by DNA LOH combined with immunohistochemistry for protein levels in tissue of 24 patients with NSCLC treated with perioperative nivolumab plus chemotherapy from NADIM trial (NCT03081689). We integrated HLA tumor status with molecular data (programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), TMB, TCR repertoire, TILs populations, bulk RNA-seq, and spatial transcriptomics (ST)) and clinical outcomes (pathological response and survival data) to study the activity of perioperative ChIO considering HLA class I defects., Results: HLA-DEF tumors comprised 41.7% of analyzed tumors and showed a desert-like microenvironment at baseline, with lower PD-L1 levels and reduced immune infiltrate. However, perioperative ChIO induced similar complete pathological response (CPR) rates in both HLA-DEF and PRO tumors (50% and 60% respectively, p=0.670), as well as 3-year survival rates: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of 70% (95% CI 32.9% to 89.2%) for HLA-DEF, and PFS 71.4% (95% CI 40.6% to 88.2%) and OS 92.9% (95% CI 59.1% to 99.0%) for HLA-PRO (log-rank PFS p=0.909, OS p=0.137). Proof-of-concept ST analysis of a CPR HLA-DEF tumor after ChIO showed a strong immune response with tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), CD4+T cells with HLA class II colocalization, and activated CD8+T cells., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the activity of perioperative ChIO, and the potential role of TLS and T-cell immune response, in NSCLC HLA-DEF tumors., Competing Interests: Competing interests: VC reports consulting fees from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Takeda, Sanofi, Agmen; payment or honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Takeda, Sanofi, Agmen, Janssen, Regeneron and Pfizer; and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD, and Takeda outside the submitted work. EN reports grants from Roche, BMS, Pfizer, and Merck Serono; consulting fees and payment or honoraria form Roche, BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Pfizer, Lilly, Amgen, Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Qiagen; payment or honoraria from Bayer; and advisory board from MSD, Roche, Apollomics, Daiichi and Transgene outside the submitted work. AM-M reports consulting fees, payment or honoraria and support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, BMS, F Hoffmann-La Roche AG, MSD, MSD Oncology, Pfizer; Steering Committee Member of AstraZeneca/MedImmune; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Lilly; and advisory board from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, MSD, BMS, and F Hoffmann-La Roche AG outside the submitted work. AI reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Roche; payment form expert testimony form BMS, Roche, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Takeda; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Takeda, and Pfizer; and advisory abroad from Roche and BMS outside the submitted work. BM reports payment or honoraria from Roche, BMS, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. SV reports payment or honoraria from Merck GmbH, MSD, BMS, Takeda, AstraZeneca, and Roche; support for attending meetings and/or travel from OSE Immunotherapeutics, Roche, and GMS; and advisory board from Merck GmbH, Puma Biotech, Takeda, Ipsen, AbbVie, Roche, and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. IBA reports payment or honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen Cilag, Lilly, MSD, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. JdC reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Sanofi, Takeda, Pfizer, and Glaxo; payment or honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Janssen, Takeda, and Sanofi; support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, MSD, and Roche; and advisory Board fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, MSD, Glaxo, Janssen, and Gilead outside the submitted work. MCo reports consulting fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer, Kyowa, Sanofi, and Janssen, as well as payment or honoraria from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Takeda, Kyowa, Pierre Fabre, Novocure, Sanofi, and Janssen outside the submitted work. JM-L reports payment or honoraria from Roche, BMS, and EUSA Pharma, as well as support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche outside the submitted work. MP reports consulting fees from BMS, AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, Takeda. Support for attending meetings and/or travel and payment or honoraria from BMS, AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, and Takeda outside the submitted work. No disclosures were reported by the other authors., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Immunotherapy-based treatments have demonstrated high efficacy in patients with advanced and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). BRAF mutations affect a small but significant fraction of NSCLC. The efficacy of these therapies in this subgroup of patients is unknown., Materials and Methods: Plasma and tissue samples from 116 resectable stage IIIA/B NSCLC patients, included in NADIM and NADIM II clinical trials (NADIM cohort), and from a prospective academic cohort with 84 stage IV NSCLC patients (BLI-O cohort), were analyzed by next-generation sequencing., Results: The p.G464E, p.G466R, p.G466V, p.G469V, p.L597Q, p.T599I, p.V600E (n = 2) BRAF mutations, were identified in four (3.45 %) samples from the NADIM cohort, all of which were cases treated with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (CH-IO), and four (4.76 %) samples from the BLI-O cohort, corresponding to cases treated with first-line immunotherapy (n = 2) or CH-IO (n = 2). All these patients were alive and had no evidence of disease at data cut-off. Conversely, patients with BRAF wild-type (wt) tumors in the BLI-O cohort had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.49 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 12.00 months (P-LogRank = 0.013 and 0.046, respectively). Likewise, PFS and OS probabilities at 36 months were 60.5 % and 76.1 % for patients with BRAF-wt tumors in the NADIM cohort. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate after neoadjuvant CH-IO in patients with BRAF-positive tumors (n = 4) was 100 %, whereas the pCR rate in the BRAF-wt population was 44.3 % (RR: 2.26; 95 % CI: 1.78-2.85; P < 0.001)., Conclusion: BRAF mutations may be a good prognostic factor for advanced and locally advanced NSCLC patients undergoing immunotherapy-based treatments., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: M. Provencio declares consulting fees, payment for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus and support for attending meetings and/or travel from BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Roche, Takeda. This author has also declared that he have a pending patent (n° EP 22 382 701.5). R. Serna-Blasco declares to be in possession of a pending patent (n° EP 22 382 701.5). E. Nadal declares Grants or contracts from Roche, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck Serono; consulting fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp Dohme, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Pfizer, Lilly, Janssen, AMGEN, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Qiagen, and Bayer; payment for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp Dohme, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Pfizer, Lilly, Janssen, Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre and Qiagen; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Takeda and Pfizer; and Participation on data safety Monitoring board or advisory board from Roche, Apollomics and MSD. M.P. Diz Taín declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB, Astra-Zeneca, Roche, MSD, Takeda, Pfizer and Amgen; support for attending meetings and/or travel from BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB, Roche, MSD and Takeda; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB, Astra-Zeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and other financial or non-financial interests from Astra-Zeneca, Roche, Mirati, and Pfizer. B. Massuti declares consulting fees and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Merck Sharpe and Dohme. J.L. González Larriba declares consulting fees from MSD, Janssen Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, and AMGEN; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from MSD, Astra Zeneca, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Astella Pharma, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, and Janssen-Cilag. A. Insa declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from AMGEN, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, and Takeda; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Pfizer, and MSD; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Astra Zeneca, Sanofi, and Pfizer. A. Sánchez-Hernández declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Lilly, MSD, Sanofi, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Takeda, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Sanofi, MSD Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. R. García-Campelo declares Grants or contracts from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, and MSC; consulting fees from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Sanofi, Takeda, Pfizer, Regeneron, AMGEN, and Astra Zeneca. J. Rogado declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Astra Zeneca, MSD, MERCK, Ferrer, Persan Farma, Fresenius Kabi, and Sanofi; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, and Lilly; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Fresenius Kabi, MSD, Sanofi. A. Martínez-Martí declares consulting fees from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche AG, MSD, and Pfizer; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche AG, MSD, MSD, and Pfizer; Payment for expert testimony from AstraZeneca/MedImmune; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann La Roche AG, MSD, Pfizer, and Lilly; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, MSD, F. Hoffmann La Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb. J. Bosch-Barrera declares consulting fees from Sanofi and Roche; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, and Pfizer; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Takeda and MSD. R. Bernabé-Caro declares an investigational grant Roche; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, MSD, Amgen, Takeda, and Astra Zeneca; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Takeda, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Astra Zeneca. J. de Castro Carpeño declares consulting from fees Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Hoffmann- La Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Sanofi, Takeda, Pfizer, and Glaxo; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus from Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Hoffmann- La Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Janssen, Takeda, and Sanofi; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astra Zaneca, MSD, and Hoffmann- La Roche; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Hoffmann- La Roche, MSD, Glaxo, Janssen, Gilead, and Sanofi. N. Reguart declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guardant Health, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Takeda, Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, and Amgen; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche, Takeda, and MSD. M. Dómine declares consulting fees and Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astra Zeneca, MSD, Pfizer, and Takeda. M. Majem declares Grants or contracts from Roche and Astra Zeneca; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Pfizer, Helsinn, Cassen, AMGEN, Janssen, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Takeda; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astra Zeneca, MSD, and Roche. A. Estival declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from MSD, Pharmamar, Astra Zeneca, Takeda, Roche, and GSK; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pharmamar; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Roche and MSD. A. López Martín declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus from GSK, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Astra Zeneca; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Pfizer and Takeda. M. A. Sala González declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Takeda and Roche; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Roche and PharmaMar. M. Cobo declares consulting fees from Novartis, Roche, Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, Lilly, Takeda, Pfizer, Kyowa, Sanofi, and Jansen. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Novartis, Astra Zeneca Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Lilly, MSD, Takeda, Kyowa, Pierre-Fabre, Novocure, Sanofi, and Jansen. I. Barneto declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Takeda, AMGEN, and Novartis; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD and Astra Zeneca; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Sanofi. V. Calvo declares consulting fees from Roche, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Sanofi, and AMGEN; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Roche, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, and Janssen; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astra Zeneca, Roche, and Takeda. A. Collazo declares Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Astra Zeneca and Janssen; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from MSD and Takeda. A. Romero declares consulting fees from Takeda; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations or speakers bureaus from Illumina, Health in code, and Thermofisher. Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Thermofisher Scientific. Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, and Takeda; the author also declares a pending patent (n° EP 22 382 701.5). The rest of the authors declare no potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The use of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as lorlatinib, for the treatment of patients with ALK gene rearrangement (or ALK-positive) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been shown to improve the overall survival and quality of life of these patients. However, lorlatinib is not exempt from potential adverse events. Adequate monitoring and management of these adverse events are critical for increasing patient adherence to lorlatinib, thereby maximizing the benefits of treatment and minimizing the risks associated with treatment discontinuation. Considering that the adverse events of lorlatinib can affect different organs and systems, the participation of a multidisciplinary team, including cardiologists, neurologists, internal medicine specialists, and oncology pharmacists, is needed. This article presents specific and pragmatic strategies for identifying and treating the most relevant adverse events associated with lorlatinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC based on the clinical experience of a multidisciplinary panel of experts., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Recent advances in the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC have led to changes in the standard of care for this disease. For the selection of the best approach strategy for each patient, it is necessary the homogenization of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, as well as the promotion of the evaluation of patients by a multidisciplinary oncology team., Objective: Development of an expert consensus document with suggestions for the approach and treatment of locally advanced NSCLC leaded by Spanish Lung Cancer Group GECP., Methods: Between March and July 2023, a panel of 28 experts was formed. Using a mixed technique (Delphi/nominal group) under the guidance of a coordinating group, consensus was reached in 4 phases: 1. Literature review and definition of discussion topics 2. First round of voting 3. Communicating the results and second round of voting 4. Definition of conclusions in nominal group meeting. Responses were consolidated using medians and interquartile ranges. The threshold for agreement was defined as 85% of the votes., Results: New and controversial situations regarding the diagnosis and management of locally advanced NSCLC were analyzed and reconciled based on evidence and clinical experience. Discussion issues included: molecular diagnosis and biomarkers, radiologic and surgical diagnosis, mediastinal staging, role of the multidisciplinary thoracic committee, neoadjuvant treatment indications, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment, postoperative evaluation, and follow-up., Conclusions: Consensus clinical suggestions were generated on the most relevant scenarios such as diagnosis, staging and treatment of locally advanced lung cancer, which will serve to support decision-making in daily practice., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The Atezo-Brain study evaluated atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with untreated brain metastases, a population traditionally excluded from trials., Methods: This single-arm phase II clinical trial enrolled patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with untreated brain metastases without neurologic symptoms or asymptomatic with medical treatment. Dexamethasone was allowed up to 4 mg once daily. Atezolizumab plus carboplatin and pemetrexed was given for four to six cycles followed by atezolizumab plus pemetrexed until progression for a maximum of 2 years. The primary end points were to determine the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 weeks and the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events during the first 9 weeks. Intracranial outcomes were assessed using response assessment in neuro-oncology brain metastases criteria., Results: Forty patients were enrolled and 22 (55%) were receiving corticosteroids at baseline. The overall 12-week PFS rate was 62.2% (95% credibility interval [CrI], 47.1 to 76.2). The rate of grade 3/4 adverse events during the first 9 weeks was 27.5%. Most neurologic events were grade 1 and 2 but five patients (12.5%) experienced grade 3-4 neurologic events. With a median follow-up of 31 months, intracranial median PFS was 6.9 months and response rate was 42.7% (95% CrI, 28.1 to 57.9). Systemic median PFS was 8.9 months and response rate was 45% (95% CrI, 28.1 to 57.9). The median overall survival (OS) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 16.9) and the 2-year OS rate was 27.5% (95% CI, 16.6 to 45.5)., Conclusion: Atezolizumab plus carboplatin and pemetrexed demonstrates activity in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC with untreated brain metastases with an acceptable safety profile.

Background: Approximately 20% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive a diagnosis of stage III disease. There is no current consensus regarding the most appropriate treatment for these patients., Methods: In this open-label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (experimental group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), followed by surgery. Patients in the experimental group who had R0 resections received adjuvant treatment with nivolumab for 6 months. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival at 24 months and safety., Results: A total of 86 patients underwent randomization; 57 were assigned to the experimental group and 29 were assigned to the control group. A pathological complete response occurred in 37% of the patients in the experimental group and in 7% in the control group (relative risk, 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 21.23; P = 0.02). Surgery was performed in 93% of the patients in the experimental group and in 69% in the control group (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.74). Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival at 24 months were 67.2% in the experimental group and 40.9% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 24 months were 85.0% in the experimental group and 63.6% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the experimental group (19%; some patients had events of both grades) and 3 patients in the control group (10%)., Conclusions: In patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, perioperative treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response and longer survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADIM II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03838159; EudraCT number, 2018-004515-45.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) presents the greatest number of identified therapeutic targets, some of which have therapeutic utility. Currently, detecting EGFR, BRAF, KRAS and MET mutations, ALK, ROS1, NTRK and RET translocations, and PD-L1 expression in these patients is considered essential. The use of next-generation sequencing facilitates precise molecular diagnosis and allows the detection of other emerging mutations, such as the HER2 mutation and predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy responses. In this consensus, a group of experts in the diagnosis and treatment of NSCLC selected by the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology have evaluated currently available information and propose a series of recommendations to optimize the detection and use of biomarkers in daily clinical practice., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) presents the greatest number of identified therapeutic targets, some of which have therapeutic utility. Currently, detecting EGFR, BRAF, KRAS and MET mutations, ALK, ROS1, NTRK and RET translocations, and PD-L1 expression in these patients is considered essential. The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) facilitates precise molecular diagnosis and allows the detection of other emerging mutations, such as the HER2 mutation and predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy responses. In this consensus, a group of experts in the diagnosis and treatment of NSCLC selected by the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) have evaluated currently available information and propose a series of recommendations to optimize the detection and use of biomarkers in daily clinical practice., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are scarce data of the costs of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) recurrence in Spain. The objective of this study is to assess the economic burden of disease recurrence, for both locoregional and/or metastatic relapses, after appropriate early-stage NSCLC treatment in Spain., Materials and Methods: A two-round consensus panel of Spanish oncologists and hospital pharmacists was conducted to collect information on patient's flow, treatments, use of healthcare resources and sick leaves in patients with relapsed NSCLC. A decision-tree model was developed to calculate the economic burden of disease recurrence after appropriate early-stage NSCLC. Both direct and indirect costs were considered. Direct costs included drug acquisition and healthcare resources costs. Indirect costs were estimated using the human-capital approach. Unit costs were obtained from national databases (euros of 2022). A multi-way sensitivity analysis was performed to provide a range to the mean values., Results: Among a cohort of 100 patients with relapsed NSCLC, 45 patients would have locoregional relapse (36.3 would eventually progress to metastasis and 8.7 would be considered in remission) and 55 patients would have metastatic relapse. Over time, 91.3 patients would experience a metastatic relapse (55 as first relapse and 36.6 after previous locoregional relapse). The overall cost incurred by the 100-patients cohort is €10,095,846 (€9,336,782 direct costs, €795,064 indirect costs). The average cost of a locoregional relapse is €25,194 (€19,658 direct costs, €5536 indirect costs), while the average cost a patient with metastasis who receives up to 4 lines of treatment is €127,167 (€117,328 direct, €9839 indirect)., Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study that specifically quantifies the cost of relapse in NSCLC in Spain. Our findings shown that the overall cost of a relapse after appropriate treatment of early-stage NSCLC patients is substantial, and it increases considerably in the metastatic relapse setting, mainly due to the high cost and long duration of first-line treatments., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: This Delphi panel study assessed the level of consensus between medical oncologists on the clinical management of patients with early-stage EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: A modified two-round Delphi approach was used. A scientific committee comprised of medical oncologists developed an online questionnaire. Delphi panel experts rated their level of agreement with each questionnaire statement on a 9-point Likert scale. The questionnaire included 36 statements from 3 domains (clinical management of early-stage NSCLC: 15 statements; role of adjuvant therapy in early-stage NSCLC: 9 statements; and role of adjuvant therapy in early-stage NSCLC with sensitizing EGFR mutation: 12 statements)., Results: In round 1, consensus was reached for 24/36 statements (66.7%). Nine statements that did not achieve consensus after the first round were evaluated in round 2, and none of them reached consensus. Overall, 84.4% of the panelists agreed that EGFR mutation testing should be done after surgery. Consensus was not achieved on whether the implementation of EGFR mutation testing in resected early-stage NSCLC could limit the use of adjuvant osimertinib. The panelists recognized the rationale for the use of osimertinib in the adjuvant scenario (88%) and 72% agreed that it may change the treatment paradigm in stage IB-IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Consensus was not reached on the inconvenience of prolonged duration of osimertinib., Conclusions: This Delphi study provides valuable insights into relevant questions in the management of early-stage EGFR-mutated NSCLC. However, specific issues remain unresolved. The expert consensus emphasizes the role of adjuvant treatment with osimertinib in this scenario., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: To assess the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant atezolizumab in the treatment of early-stage NSCLC patients (stage II-IIIA) with expression PD-L1 ≥ 50% without mutations in EGFR or ALK rearrangements in Spain., Materials and Methods: A 5-states Markov model (DFS, locoregional recurrence, 1 L-metastatic recurrence, 2 L-metastatic recurrence, and death states) was adapted to the Spanish setting. Demographic characteristics of the hypothetical cohort, transition probabilities from the DFS state, and safety parameters were obtained from IMpower010 study (GO29527). Transition probabilities from locoregional and metastatic health states were obtained from the literature. The usual clinical practice in Spain (use of health resources, management of the disease, etc.) was obtained from a previous analysis carried out by the authors of this study. A societal perspective was considered so both direct and indirect costs were included (expressed in € of 2021). A lifetime horizon was used, so costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3% per year. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate uncertainty., Results: Over a lifetime horizon, treatment with adjuvant atezolizumab provided greater effectiveness (+2.61 life years [LY] and +1.95 quality-adjusted life years [QALY]) and higher cost (€+22,538) than BSC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) of the analysis were €8,625/LY gained and €11,583/QALY gained, respectively. Robustness of these base-case results was confirmed by the sensitivity analyses performed. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 90% of the simulations performed showed that adjuvant atezolizumab is cost-effective versus BSC, considering a threshold of €30,000/QALY., Conclusions: Our results showed that adjuvant treatment with atezolizumab in patients with early-stage resected NSCLC with overexpression of PD-L1 and without EGFR and ALK mutations is cost-effective versus BSC as the ICERs and ICURs obtained are below the cost-effectiveness thresholds commonly considered in Spain, thus offering a new treatment alternative for these patients.

This retrospective observational study analyzed the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of 120 patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALK+ NSCLC) according to data collected between November 2019 and October 2020 in 38 Spanish hospitals. Patients had progressed after 1-5 prior treatment lines (which included crizotinib in any prior line) and received subsequent therapy with alectinib in a local expanded access program. Median age was 58.7 years, 50% of patients were female, 64.1% had ECOG PS of 0-1, 85% presented stage IV, 95% had adenocarcinoma histology and 20.8% had brain metastases. After a median 9.6 months of alectinib treatment, objective response rate (ORR) was 54.5%, disease control rate (DCR) was 80%, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months and median overall survival (OS) was 24.1 months. Patients with brain metastases achieved an intracranial DCR of 71.4%. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 35.8% of patients (14.2% of AEs were grade ≥3). Over 40% of patients received some treatment after alectinib, most frequently lorlatinib (65.2%) and brigatinib (32.6%). This study provides information on real-world treatment patterns and confirms the tolerability and prolonged PFS and OS observed with alectinib in clinical trials, in unselected pretreated patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST R. B.-C. reports advisory honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and AstraZeneca; speaker honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Amgen; and grants from Roche. P. G. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Medscape, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda and Sanofi, and speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. R. G.-C. reports consultancy fees and speaker honoraria from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Bristol-Myers, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda, Bayer and Janssen. R. P. reports speaker honoraria from Guardant Health, Pfizer, Roche, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Merck-Sharp-Dome; travel/meeting attendance expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome and Roche, and membership of data safety monitoring from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Roche. A. A. reports consultancy fees from Roche, Takeda, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. C. B. reports consultancy fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim and AstraZeneca; speaker honoraria from Pfizer, Merk, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Amgen; meeting and courses attendance expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Roche, Merk, AstraZeneca and Boehringer-Ingelheim. D. R.-A. reports honoraria for lectures and consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD and Hoffmann-La Roche. M. L.-B. reports travel grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, and Merck-Sharp-Dome; speaker honoraria, consulting fees and continuing medical education expenses from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Takeda. A. P. declares no conflicts of interests. D. V. reports speaker honoraria from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; and travel/accommodation expenses from Merck-Sharp-Dome, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. J. M. S.-T. reports consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and travel/accommodation expenses from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Roche. M. M. reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, and AstraZeneca; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Takeda, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Vifor and Bayer. P. D. reports speaker honoraria and consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Takeda; speaker honoraria from Pfizer and Amgen; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Mirati, and personal and institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Roche. R. G. and M. G. are Roche Farma employees. J. d. C. reports educational fees from Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck-Sharp-Dome, and Roche; consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Merck-Sharp-Dome, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. All potential conflicts of interests were outside of the submitted work., (Copyright: © 2022 Bernabé-Caro et al.)

Background: The ETOP 10-16 BOOSTER trial failed to demonstrate a progression-free survival (PFS) benefit for adding bevacizumab to osimertinib in second line. An exploratory subgroup analysis, however, suggested a PFS benefit of the combination in patients with a smoking history and prompted us to do this study., Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the differential effect of smoking status on the benefit of adding an angiogenesis inhibitor to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy was carried out. All relevant randomized controlled trials appearing in main oncology congresses or in PubMed as of 1 November 2021 were used according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Primarily PFS according to smoking status, and secondarily overall survival (OS) were of interest. Pooled and interaction hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by fixed or random effects models, depending on the detected degree of heterogeneity. Bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool for randomized controlled trials (RoB 2)., Results: Information by smoking was available for 1291 patients for PFS (seven studies) and 678 patients for OS (four studies). The risk of bias was low for all studies. Combination treatment significantly prolonged PFS for smokers [n = 502, HR = 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.69] but not for nonsmokers (n = 789, HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.66-1.27; treatment-by-smoking interaction P = 0.02). Similarly, a significant OS benefit was found for smokers (n = 271, HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47-0.93) but not for nonsmokers (n = 407, HR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.82-1.42; treatment-by-smoking interaction P = 0.03)., Conclusion: In advanced EGFR-non-small-cell lung cancer patients, the addition of an angiogenesis inhibitor to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy provides a statistically significant PFS and OS benefit in smokers, but not in non-smokers. The biological basis for this observation should be pursued and could determine whether this might be due to a specific co-mutational pattern produced by tobacco exposure., Competing Interests: Disclosure UD reports honorarium as Member of the Tumor Agnostic Evidence Generation working Group of Roche, outside the submitted work. RASo reports advisory role for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Boehringer Ingelheim, Lily, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Taiho, Takeda, and Yuhan and grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. SP reports grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Illumina, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), personal fees from Amgen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biocartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffman-La Roche, Foundations Medicine, Illumina, Janssen, Novartis, PharmaMar, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, MSD, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Medscape, Phosphoplatin Therapeutics, Beigene, Imedex, outside the submitted work. JDC reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, and Hoffmann-La Roche, personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Jansen-Cilag, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. LC reports advisory role for AstraZeneca, Roche, and Daichi, outside the submitted work. MF reports grants from AstraZeneca and BMS and other support AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. EN reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Roche, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, grants and personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Takeda, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Pfizer, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. EC reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, BMS, MSD, and Roche, outside the submitted work. MAS reports advisory role for Roche and Boehringer Ingelheim, speaker role for Pierre Fabre, and travel grants from Roche and PharmaMar, outside the submitted work. RB reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Amgen, and MSD, participation on Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca, BMS, and Roche, outside the submitted work. MP reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, BMS, and Roche, personal fees from MSD and Takeda, outside the submitted work. SC reports non-financial support from Pfizer, Roche, MSD, BMS, outside the submitted work. RASt reports consultant or advisory role for AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, speaker honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Blueprint, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) role from Genentech/Roche and Takeda, and financial support for ETOP and IBCSG trials (where he is president), from AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Celgene, Ipsen, Janssen, Mirati, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: While osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) is the standard treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with sensitising EGFR and acquired T790M mutations, progression inevitably occurs. The angiogenic pathway is implicated in EGFR TKI resistance., Patients and Methods: BOOSTER is an open-label randomised phase II trial investigating the efficacy and safety of combined osimertinib 80 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, versus osimertinib alone, in patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC and acquired T790M mutations after failure on previous EGFR TKI therapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs)., Results: Between May 2017 and February 2019, 155 patients were randomised (combination: 78; osimertinib: 77). At data cut-off of 22 February 2021, median follow-up was 33.8 months [interquartile range (IQR): 26.5-37.6 months] and 129 (83.2%) PFS events were reported in the intention-to-treat population. There was no difference in median PFS between the combination [15.4 months; 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-18.0 months] and osimertinib arm (12.3 months; 95% CI 6.2-17.2 months; stratified log-rank P = 0.83), [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% CI 0.68-1.37]. Median OS was 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-32.1 months) in the combination arm and 24.3 months (95% CI 16.9-37.0 months) in the osimertinib arm (stratified log-rank P = 0.91), (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.67-1.56). Exploratory analysis revealed a significant interaction of smoking history with treatment for PFS (adjusted P = 0.0052) with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.30-0.90) for smokers, and 1.47 (95% CI 0.92-2.33) for never smokers. ORR was 55% in both arms and the median time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in the combination than in the osimertinib arm, 8.2 months versus 10.8 months, respectively (P = 0.0074). Safety of osimertinib and bevacizumab was consistent with previous reports with grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) reported in 47% and 18% of patients on combination and osimertinib alone, respectively., Conclusions: No difference in PFS was observed between osimertinib plus bevacizumab and osimertinib alone. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were more common in patients on combination., Competing Interests: Disclosure RAS reports advisory role for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lily, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Taiho, Takeda and Yuhan and grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. UD reports honorarium as Member of the Tumor Agnostic Evidence Generation working Group of Roche, outside the submitted work. BCC reports grants from Novartis, Bayer, AstraZeneca, MOGAM Institute, Dong-A ST, Champions Oncology, Janssen, Yuhan, Ono, Dizal Pharma, MSD, Abbvie, Medpacto, GI Innovation, Eli Lilly, Blueprint medicines, Interpark Bio Convergence Corp, personal fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Champions Oncology, Janssen, Yuhan, Ono, MSD, Medpacto, Eli Lilly, Blueprint medicines, Interpark Bio Convergence Corp, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, Takeda, KANAPH Therapeutic Inc., Bridgebio therapeutics, Cyrus therapeutics, Guardant Health, Joseah BIO, Gencurix Inc., and other from Interpark Bio Convergence Corp, KANAPH Therapeutic Inc., Bridgebio therapeutics, Cyrus therapeutics, Gencurix Inc, DAAN, TheraCanVac Inc., outside the submitted work. EN reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers-Squibb, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck Sharp Dohme, grants and personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Takeda, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. EC reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, BMS, MSD and Roche, outside the submitted work. JdC reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp and Dohme and Hoffmann-La Roche, personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Glaxosmithkline, Jansen-Cilag, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Takeda, outside the submitted work. MAS reports advisory role for Roche and Boehringer Ingelheim, speaker role for Pierre Fabre and travel grants from Roche and PharmaMar, outside the submitted work. RB reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, AMGEN and MSD, participation on Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca, BMS and Roche. LC reports advisory role for AstraZeneca, Roche and Daichi, outside the submitted work. MPP reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, BMS and ROCHE, personal fees from MSD and TAKEDA, outside the submitted work. RGC reports Advisory Board, Consultancy or Speaker honoraria from MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Takeda, Janssen and Sanofi. SC reports non-financial support from Pfizer, Roche, MSD and BMS, outside the submitted work. MF reports grants from Astra Zeneca and BMS and other support from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda, outside the submitted work. JGS reports grants for consulting or advisory role from Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, EUSA Pharma, research funding from Roche and travel, and accommodation expenses from Roche, BMS, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. MD reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda, outside the submitted work. MM reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pierre Fabre, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, F. Hoffman – La Roche, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and personal fees from Kyowa Kirin, outside the submitted work. JMST reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda and MSD, outside the submitted work. CB reports consulting or advisory role for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag and Boehringer Ingelheim, as well as travel support from AstraZeneca and Takeda, outside the submitted work. MP reports grants from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Takeda, Vifor, and personal fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisei, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Merck and Janssen, outside the submitted work. RAS reports consultant or advisory role for AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Seattle Genetics and Takeda, speaker honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Blueprint, Eli Lilly, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Roche and Sandoz, DMC role from Genentech/Roche and Takeda, and financial support for ETOP and IBCSG trials, where he is president and scientific chair, from AstraZeneca, BMS, Ipsen, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche and Pfizer. SP reports grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis, F. Hoffman – La Roche, Illumina, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees from Amgen, Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biocartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffman – La Roche, Foundations Medicine, Illumina, Janssen, Novartis, Pharma Mar, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Merck Serono, Merrimack, Medscape, Phosphoplatin Therapeutics, Beigene and Imedex, outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Lung cancer continues to be the leading cause of cancer mortality and a serious health problem despite the numerous advances made in the last decade and the rapid advance of research in this field. In recent years, there has been a decrease in mortality from lung cancer coinciding with the approval times of targeted therapy. To date, targeted therapy has been used in the context of advanced disease in clinical practice, with great benefits in survival and quality of life. The next step will be to incorporate targeted therapy into the treatment of earlier stages of non-small-cell lung cancer, and there is already a randomized trial showing a disease-free survival benefit. However, there are many questions that need to be resolved first. In the present review, the authors discuss the findings of published reports and ongoing clinical trials assessing the role of targeted therapies in nonmetastatic disease.

Aim: To stablish a consensus on the treatment strategy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation (EGFRm) in Spain., Methods: After a systematic literature review, the scientific committee developed 33 statements in 4 fields: molecular diagnosis (10 items); histologic profile and patient clinical characteristics (7 items); first-line (1L) treatment in EGFRm aNSCLC (8 items); and subsequent-line treatment (8 items). A panel of 31 experts completed 2 Delphi online questionnaires rating their degree of agreement/disagreement for each statement through a 1-9 range scale (1-3 = disagree, 7-9 = agree). Consensus was reached if 2/3 of the participants are in the median range., Results: In the first Delphi round consensus was achieved for 24/33 of the statements. One of the assertions was deleted, proceeding to a second round with the eight remaining questions with no consensus or in the range of indeterminacy. Determination of the EGFR status from tissue and analysis of the different biomarkers are two important variables that influenced treatment decision in patients with aNSCLC. 1L treatment should be the best therapeutic option, independently of the subsequent lines of treatment. For patients with the most common activating mutations osimertinib was considered the most efficient and safe 1L option. In case of disease progression, a new biopsy was needed., Conclusions: A consensus document is proposed to optimize the treatment strategy for untreated patients with a NSCLC with EGFR sensitizing mutations.

Identifying the druggable target is crucial for patients with nonsquamous advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This article adds to the spectrum of ROS1 fusion cases described in NSCLC. We describe a novel SLC12A2-ROS1 rearrangement that has not been previously reported in other cancers: a fusion that has clinical and radiological sensitivity to crizotinib. Fluorescence in situ hybridization detected the SLC12A2-ROS1 fusion and it was confirmed through hybrid capture-based next-generation sequencing (NGS); however, the fusion could not be detected by amplicon-based assay. The success of implementing NGS into routine clinical practice depends on the accuracy of testing. The test's methodological features should then be considered because they significantly affect the results. Given this patient's response to crizotinib, identifying patients with undescribed ROS1 fusions has important therapeutic implications. KEY POINTS: This is the first known description of an SLC12A2-ROS1 fusion. Considering the patient's clinical features and tumor response observed after crizotinib therapy, the authors confirm that this new rearrangement has relevant clinical impact for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The success of implementing next-generation sequencing (NGS) into routine clinical practice depends on the accuracy of the testing. Different assays and NGS platforms can achieve differing results. Each assay's limitations need to be considered to ensure the quality of precision medicine in clinical practice., (© 2021 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Lung cancer in young patients is an uncommon and understudied entity that harbors distinctive epidemiological, clinic-demographic, and genomic features. We carried out a systematic review of genomic profiling in young patients with lung cancer from 2010 to 2020 in the main electronic databases and selected 23 manuscripts. Lung cancer in young patients occurs more frequently in women with adenocarcinoma histology and at more advanced stages. Some studies report higher oncogenic genomic alteration in this population, with higher anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangements, a distinct profile of epidermal growth factor receptor mutations, and other novel genomic alterations. Although still uncommon, the implementation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) has shed some light on germline genomic alterations associated with lung cancer in young patients. Although outcomes when compared with the older population are conflicting, the overall prognosis is still poor in this subset of patients and efforts to find targetable genomic alterations should be made to improve survival., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Little is known about the impact of sex on lung cancer patients from the psychological, economic and social perspectives. This study was designed to explore the psychosocial and economic impact according to sex of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) in patients and caregivers., Methods: Exploratory study of two cohorts of patients starting first-line treatment for mNSCLC. The following questionnaires were administered at baseline, 4 months later and following the first and second disease progression: APGAR, relationship impact scale, DUKE-UNC scale, economic impact in patients and caregiver, and Zarit scale. It was planned to include 1250 patients to get an 80% possibility of detecting as significant (p < 0.05) effect sizes less than 0.19 between men and women. Univariate comparisons were made between the tests applied to men and women. Overall survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method. Cox analyses were done to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CI., Results: 333 patients were included. Most families reported to continue being functional despite the lung cancer diagnosis. Regardless of sex, they did not perceive changes in their partner relationship. Most patients felt their social support was normal. Roughly 25% of people reported a worsening in their economic situation, without remarkable differences by sex. Statistically significant differences were found between both groups regarding the caregiver's relationship to the patient (more parents were the caregiver in females than in males, p < 0.0001) and the caregiver's employment situation (more employed caregivers in females) (p < 0.0001). Most caregivers of both sexes considered that taking care of their relative did not pose a significant burden., Conclusions: This study provides a preliminary insight into sex-related characteristics in the management of advanced NSCLC and its impact on the emotional, social and economic burden of patients and their caregivers, and recall the high priority of researching in cancer from a sex perspective. Nevertheless, due to the low recruitment rate and the relevant loss of patients during the follow-up, it was difficult to find differences by sex., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02336061., Ethics Committee: Comité Ético de Investigación Clínica del Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Spain. Reference number: HCB/2014/0705.

Next-generation ALK TKIs have become the new standard of care in first-line setting in advanced ALK-positive NSCLC patients. However, sequential strategies at progression are relevant, as may have an impact on patients' outcome. In this commentary we discuss whether genomic-tailored strategies at progression would be more suitable for improving outcome of ALK-positive NSCLC patients.

In 2011, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) initiated a joint project to establish guidelines for biomarker testing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer based on the information available at the time. As this field is constantly evolving, these guidelines were updated in 2012 and 2015 and now in 2019. Current evidence suggests it should be mandatory to test all patients with this kind of advanced lung cancer for EGFR and BRAF mutations, ALK and ROS1 rearrangements and PD-L1 expression. The growing need to study other emerging biomarkers has promoted the routine use of massive sequencing (next-generation sequencing, NGS). However, the coordination of every professional involved and the prioritisation of the most suitable tests and technologies for each case remain a challenge., (Copyright © 2020 Sociedad Española de Anatomía Patológica. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

In 2011 the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) started a joint project to establish guidelines on biomarker testing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on current evidence. As this field is constantly evolving, these guidelines have been updated, previously in 2012 and 2015 and now in 2019. Current evidence suggests that the mandatory tests to conduct in all patients with advanced NSCLC are for EGFR and BRAF mutations, ALK and ROS1 rearrangements and PD-L1 expression. The growing need to study other emerging biomarkers has promoted the routine use of massive sequencing (next-generation sequencing, NGS). The coordination of every professional involved and the prioritisation of the most suitable tests and technologies for each case remains a challenge.

Introduction: 85% of lung cancers are non-small cell carcinomas (NSCLC), the majority of which are diagnosed in an advanced stage. Immunotherapy has changed the treatment pattern for these tumors and created the need to find a marker for patient selection. Although not ideal, PD-L1 is the biomarker currently used in clinical practice., Material and Methods: Retrospective review by two pathologists of 53 cases of NSCLC from 2005 to 2007 in Hospital Universitario La Paz, using the WHO 2015 classification studying PD-L1 with clones 22C3 and 28-8. The consistency between observers and clones was assessed and all data studied were correlated with survival rates., Results: We found a prevalence of PD-L1 expression in tumor cells (TC) similar to that previously reported in the literature and a very good consistency between clones in the evaluation of TC and immune cells (ICC 0.99-0.93, p<.001). Interobserver concordance was very good in the evaluation of TC (ICC 0.902, 95% CI: 0.836-0.942, p<.001 for clone 22C3 and ICC 0.927, 95% CI: 0.877-0.957, p<.001 for clone 28-8) and poor for immune cells (ICC of 0.413, 95% CI: 0.163-0.613, p=.001 with clone 22C3 and ICC of 0.313, 95% CI: 0.053-0.534, p=.010 with clone 28-8). Subtype and histological grade were the only variables related to prognosis., Conclusions: The clones of PD-L1 22C3 and 28-8 are equivalent and there is good interobserver consistency in the evaluation of TC but not in immune cells., (Copyright © 2019 Sociedad Española de Anatomía Patológica. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The ROS1 gene rearrangement has become an important biomarker in NSCLC. The College of American Pathologists/International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/Association for Molecular Pathology testing guidelines support the use of ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) as a screening test, followed by confirmation with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or a molecular test in all positive results. We have evaluated a novel anti-ROS1 IHC antibody (SP384) in a large multicenter series to obtain real-world data., Methods: A total of 43 ROS1 FISH-positive and 193 ROS1 FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened by using two antibodies (clone D4D6 from Cell Signaling Technology and clone SP384 from Ventana Medical Systems), and the different interpretation criteria were compared with break-apart FISH (Vysis). FISH-positive samples were also analyzed with next-generation sequencing (Oncomine Dx Target Test Panel, Thermo Fisher Scientific)., Results: An H-score of 150 or higher or the presence of at least 70% of tumor cells with an intensity of staining of 2+ or higher by the SP384 clone was the optimal cutoff value (both with 93% sensitivity and 100% specificity). The D4D6 clone showed similar results, with an H-score of at least 100 (91% sensitivity and 100% specificity). ROS1 expression in normal lung was more frequent with use of the SP384 clone (p < 0.0001). The ezrin gene (EZR)-ROS1 variant was associated with membranous staining and an isolated green signal FISH pattern (p = 0.001 and p = 0.017, respectively)., Conclusions: The new SP384 ROS1 IHC clone showed excellent sensitivity without compromising specificity, so it is another excellent analytical option for the proposed testing algorithm., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Resistance to tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is a clinical challenge in patients with oncogene-driven non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC). We have analyzed the utility of next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to impact the clinical care of patients with TKI resistance., Materials and Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional prospective study including consecutive EGFR, ALK, or ROS1-altered NSCLC patients with TKI resistance from 12 Spanish institutions. Post-progression ctDNA NGS was performed by Guardant Health (Guardant360 assay)., Results: We included 53 patients separated in 3 cohorts: 31 EGFR-mutant NSCLCs with first/second-generation TKI resistance (cohort 1), 15 EGFR T790M + NSCLCs with osimertinib resistance (cohort 2), and 7 ALK/ROS1-rearranged NSCLCs with crizotinib and/or next-generation TKI resistance (cohort 3). Besides Guardant360, 22 patients from cohort 1 (71%) underwent post-progression tumor biopsies and/or alternative plasma-based genotyping. In the entire study population, 34 patients (64%) had reliable evidence of tumor-DNA shed for resistance assessment, and 24 patients (45%) had actionable alterations. Target-independent pathogenic alterations were frequently detected, particularly at osimertinib resistance. Eleven patients (20%) received subsequent molecular-guided therapies indicated by plasma NGS alone (n = 9, 17%), or plasma NGS and tissue sequencing (n = 2, 4%), deriving the expected clinical benefit. Of these, 9 had EGFR T790 M mutation and received osimertinib, 1 had ALK G1202R mutation and received lorlatinib, and 1 had ROS1 G2032R mutation and received cabozantinib. Two additional cases from cohort 1 (6%) had undetectable EGFR T790 M by Guardant360 but were T790M + by tissue and BEAMing digital PCR respectively, and also received osimertinib., Conclusion: NGS of ctDNA detects actionable alterations in a large proportion of oncogene-driven NSCLC patients with TKI resistance, and can be used to guide subsequent treatments as a complement or alternative to tissue or PCR-based plasma genotyping in the real-world clinical setting., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

DUSP6/MKP3 is a dual-specific phosphatase that regulates extracellular regulated kinase ERK1/2 and ERK5 activity, with an increasingly recognized role as tumor suppressor. In silico studies from Gene expression Omnibus (GEO) and Cancer Genome atlas (TCGA) databases reveal poor prognosis in those Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with low expression levels of DUSP6 . In agreement with these data, here we show that DUSP6 plays a major role in the regulation of cell migration, motility and tumor growth. We have found upregulation in the expression of several genes involved in epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) in NSCLC- DUSP6 depleted cells. Data obtained in RNA-seq studies carried out in DUSP6 depleted cells identified EGFR, TGF-β and WNT signaling pathways and several genes such as VAV3, RUNXR2, LEF1, FGFR2 whose expression is upregulated in these cells and therefore affecting cellular functions such as integrin mediated cell adhesion, focal adhesion and motility. Furthermore, EGF signaling pathway is activated via ERK5 and not ERK1/2 and TGF-β via SMAD2/3 in DUSP6 depleted cells. In summary DUSP6 is a tumor suppressor in NSCLC and re-establishment of its expression may be a potential strategy to revert poor outcome in NSCLC patients.

Aim: To assess the patterns of disease progression in advanced/metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) on first-line treatment with erlotinib and identify potential prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS)., Patients and Methods: Patients with stage IIIB/IV EGFR-mutation-positive NSCLC receiving first-line erlotinib were followed-up until 24 months after the last patient was enrolled or until premature withdrawal for any cause., Results: A total of 127 evaluable patients were enrolled. The median PFS and overall survival were 8.8 and 19.1 months, respectively. Disease progression was asymptomatic in 57.6% of patients and 53.3% developed new sites of metastasis. The presence of liver metastasis was identified as an independent prognostic factor for poor PFS., Conclusion: Metastatic progression with asymptomatic disease seems to be the predominant pattern of disease progression on first-line erlotinib in real-life practice in patients with advanced/metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Additionally, the presence of liver metastases may negatively affect PFS in these patients., (Copyright© 2019, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Adjuvant chemotherapy for solid tumors based on platinum-derived compounds such as cisplatin is the treatment of choice in most cases. Cisplatin triggers signaling pathways that lead to cell death, but it also induces changes in tumor cells that modify the therapeutic response, thereby leading to cisplatin resistance. We have recently reported that microRNA-7 is silenced by DNA methylation and is involved in the resistance to platinum in cancer cells through the action of the musculoaponeurotic fibrosarcoma oncogene family, protein G (MAFG). In the present study, we first confirm the miR-7 epigenetic regulation of MAFG in 44 normal- and/or tumor-paired samples in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We also provide translational evidence of the role of MAFG and the clinical outcome in NSCLC by the interrogation of two extensive in silico databases of 2019 patients. Moreover, we propose that MAFG-mediated resistance could be conferred due to lower reactive oxygen species production after cisplatin exposure. We developed specifically selected aptamers against MAFG, with high sensitivity to detect the protein at a nuclear level probed by aptacytochemistry and histochemistry analyses. The inhibition of MAFG activity through the action of the specific aptamer apMAFG6F increased the levels of reactive oxygen species production and the sensitivity to cisplatin. We report first the specific nuclear identification of MAFG as a novel detection method for diagnosis in NSCLC, and then we report that MAFG modulates the redox response and confers cell protection against free radicals generated after platinum administration, thus also being a promising therapeutic target., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The goals of this multinational retrospective study were to describe treatment patterns and survival outcomes by receipt of molecular testing and molecular status of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: This chart review study, conducted in Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Brazil, included 1440 patients with newly diagnosed advanced (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC initiating systemic therapy from January 2011 through June 2013, with follow-up until July 2016. We evaluated treatment patterns and survival by histology, line of therapy, molecular testing, and test results for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and/or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement. Country-specific data were analyzed descriptively and presented as ranges (lowest to highest country). Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Patients with ≥1 molecular test varied from 43% (Brazil) to 85% (Taiwan). Numerically greater proportions of patients who were female, Asian, or never/former-smokers, and those with nonsquamous histology or stage-IV NSCLC, received a test. Testing was common for nonsquamous NSCLC (54%, Brazil, to 91%, Taiwan), with positive EGFR and ALK tests from 17% (Brazil and Spain) to 67% (Taiwan) and from 0% (Brazil) to 60% (Taiwan), respectively. First-line treatment regimens for nonsquamous NSCLC with positive EGFR/ALK tests included targeted therapy for 30% (Germany) to 89% (Japan); with negative/inconclusive test results, platinum-based combinations for 88% (Japan) to 98% (Brazil); and if not tested, platinum-based combinations for 80% (Australia) to 95% (Japan), except in Taiwan, where 44% received single agents. Median OS from first-line therapy initiation was 10.0 (Japan) to 26.7 (Taiwan) months for those tested and 7.6 (Australia/Brazil) to 19.3 (Taiwan) months for those not tested., Conclusions: We observed substantial variation among countries in testing percentages, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes. Efforts to optimize molecular testing rates should be implemented in the context of each country's health care scenario., Competing Interests: Dae Ho Lee reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CJ Healthcare, Eli Lilly, Jansen, Merck, MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Roche, and Samyang Biopharm for participating in advisory boards; and receipt of consulting fees from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), Korea, and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), Korea. Ming-Sound Tsao reports honoraria for advisory board meetings from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Ventana/Roche, and Merck. Hiroshi Isobe has received payment for speaking engagements from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Chugai, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., and Eli Lilly Japan, K.K. Smita Kothari, Ashwini Arunachalam, Xiting Cao, and Thomas Burke are employees of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, which supplied the funding for this study. Amparo Valladares is an employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme de España S.A., Madrid, Spain. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: This is the first trial to directly compare efficacy and safety of alectinib versus standard chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have progressed on, or were intolerant to, crizotinib., Patients and Methods: ALUR (MO29750; NCT02604342) was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III trial of alectinib versus chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib. Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2, both every 3 weeks) until disease progression, death, or withdrawal. Primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Altogether, 107 patients were randomized (alectinib, n = 72; chemotherapy, n = 35) in 13 countries across Europe and Asia. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9-12.2] with alectinib and 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.6) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.15 (95% CI: 0.08-0.29); P < 0.001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS was also significantly longer with alectinib [HR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.17-0.59); median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI: 6.3-10.8) with alectinib and 1.6 months (95% CI: 1.3-4.1) with chemotherapy]. In patients with measurable baseline central nervous system (CNS) disease (alectinib, n = 24; chemotherapy, n = 16), CNS objective response rate was significantly higher with alectinib (54.2%) versus chemotherapy (0%; P < 0.001). Grade ≥3 adverse events were more common with chemotherapy (41.2%) than alectinib (27.1%). Incidence of AEs leading to study-drug discontinuation was lower with alectinib (5.7%) than chemotherapy (8.8%), despite alectinib treatment duration being longer (20.1 weeks versus 6.0 weeks)., Conclusion: Alectinib significantly improved systemic and CNS efficacy versus chemotherapy for crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC patients, with a favorable safety profile., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02604342; Roche study MO29750.

Background: Data are scarce regarding real-world health care resource use (HCRU) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An understanding of current clinical practices and HCRU is needed to provide a benchmark for rapidly evolving NSCLC management recommendations and therapeutic options. The objective of this study was to describe real-world HCRU for patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: This multinational, retrospective chart review study was conducted at academic and community oncology sites in Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Brazil. Deidentified data were drawn from medical records of 1440 adults (≥18 years old) who initiated systemic therapy (2011 to mid-2013) for a new, confirmed diagnosis of advanced or metastatic (stage IIIB or IV) NSCLC. We summarized HCRU associated with first and subsequent lines of systemic therapy for advanced/metastatic NSCLC., Results: The proportion of patients who were hospitalized at least once varied by country from 24% in Italy to 81% in Japan during first-line therapy and from 22% in Italy to 84% in Japan during second-line therapy; overall hospitalization frequency was 2.5-11.1 per 100 patient-weeks, depending on country. Emergency visit frequency also varied among countries (overall from 0.3-5.9 per 100 patient-weeks), increasing consistently from first- through third-line therapy in each country. The outpatient setting was the most common setting of resource use. Most patients in the study had multiple outpatient visits in association with each line of therapy (overall from 21.1 to 59.0 outpatient visits per 100 patient-weeks, depending on country). The use of health care resources showed no regular pattern associated with results of tests for activating mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements., Conclusions: HCRU varied across countries. These findings suggest differing approaches to the clinical management of advanced NSCLC among the eight countries. Comparative findings and an understanding of country-specific clinical practices can help to identify areas of need and guide future resource allocation for patients with advanced NSCLC. Further studies evaluating the costs associated with resource use are warranted.

Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) are critical regulators of cell biology whose alteration can lead to the development of diseases such as cancer. The potential role of lncRNAs and their epigenetic regulation in response to platinum treatment are largely unknown. We analyzed four paired cisplatin-sensitive/resistant non-small cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer cell lines. The epigenetic landscape of overlapping and cis-acting lncRNAs was determined by combining human microarray data on 30,586 lncRNAs and 20,109 protein coding mRNAs with whole-genome bisulfite sequencing. Selected candidate lncRNAs were further characterized by PCR, gene-ontology analysis, and targeted bisulfite sequencing. Differential expression in response to therapy was observed more frequently in cis-acting than in overlapping lncRNAs (78% vs. 22%, fold change ≥1.5), while significantly altered methylation profiles were more commonly associated with overlapping lncRNAs (29% vs. 8%; P value <0.001). Moreover, overlapping lncRNAs contain more CpG islands (CGIs) (25% vs. 17%) and the majority of CGI-containing overlapping lncRNAs share these CGIs with their associated coding genes (84%). The differences in expression between sensitive and resistant cell lines were replicated in 87% of the selected candidates (P<0.05), while our bioinformatics approach identifying differential methylation was confirmed in all of the selected lncRNAs (100%). Five lncRNAs under epigenetic regulation appear to be involved in cisplatin resistance (AC091814.2, AC141928.1, RP11-65J3.1-002, BX641110, and AF198444). These novel findings provide new insights into epigenetic mechanisms and acquired resistance to cisplatin that highlight specific lncRNAs, some with unknown function, that may signal strategies in epigenetic therapies.

Background: The WORLD07 project is a female specific database to assess the characteristics of women with lung cancer., Methods: WORLD07 database sets up in 2007, and prospectively stores clinical characteristics, treatment, outcome, and follow-up of lung cancer women. All women with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were selected for this analysis., Results: From October 2007 to December 2012, a total of 1775 NSCLC women were recruited. EGFR mutation was identified in 34.4% of patients. Upfront EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) reported a response rate of 60%, a median progression-free survival of 11.7 months, and median overall survival of 23.0 months. EGFR TKI, EGFR-mutation type, and smoking status did not impact in the outcome of treated women., Conclusion: Prevalence of EGFR mutation in women with NSCLC is higher than overall population with NSCLC. Efficacy of EGFR TKI in this real-world setting is similar to that previously reported.

The aim of this multinational retrospective cohort study, conducted at academic and community oncology centres, was to describe real-world treatment patterns for patients with a confirmed diagnosis of advanced/metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who initiated first-line systemic therapy from January 2011 through June 2014. The study included 1265 patients in Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Korea, Taiwan and Brazil. The proportion of patients with squamous versus non-squamous NSCLC was approximately 20% versus 75%, and associated patient demographic characteristics were similar in all countries, excepting race. Patients with squamous NSCLC were predominantly male and current/ex-smokers. Biomarker tests were performed for the majority of patients with non-squamous NSCLC, ranging from 54% (Brazil) to 91% in Taiwan, where, of those tested, 68% with non-squamous NSCLC had positive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutation status; in other countries the EGFR-positive percentages ranged from 17% (Spain/Brazil) to 40% (Korea). Platinum-based regimens were the most common first-line therapy in all countries except Taiwan, where gefitinib was the most common first-line agent. Median overall survival ranged from 9.3 months (Brazil) to 25.5 months (Taiwan). The diagnostic and treatment patterns recorded in this study were heterogeneous but largely in line with NSCLC guidelines during the study period., (© 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Cancer Care Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) progression is common in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving crizotinib. Next-generation ALK inhibitors have shown activity against CNS metastases, but accurate assessment of response and progression is vital. Data from two phase II studies in crizotinib-refractory ALK+ NSCLC were pooled to examine the CNS efficacy of alectinib, a CNS-active ALK inhibitor, using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) and Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology high-grade glioma (RANO-HGG) criteria., Methods: Both studies enrolled patients aged ≥18 years who had previously received crizotinib. NP28761 was conducted in North America and NP28673 was a global study. All patients received 600 mg oral alectinib twice daily and had baseline CNS imaging. CNS response for those with baseline CNS metastases was determined by an independent review committee., Results: Baseline measurable CNS disease was identified in 50 patients by RECIST and 43 by RANO-HGG. CNS objective response rate was 64.0% by RECIST (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.2-77.1; 11 CNS complete responses [CCRs]) and 53.5% by RANO-HGG (95% CI: 37.7-68.8; eight CCRs). CNS responses were durable, with consistent estimates of median duration of 10.8 months with RECIST and 11.1 months with RANO-HGG. Of the 39 patients with measurable CNS disease by both RECIST and RANO-HGG, only three (8%) had CNS progression according to one criteria but not the other (92% concordance rate)., Conclusion: Alectinib demonstrated promising efficacy in the CNS for ALK+ NSCLC patients pretreated with crizotinib, regardless of the assessment criteria used., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: First-line bevacizumab-based therapies have been shown to improve clinical outcomes in patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to descriptively analyse patients with non-squamous NSCLC who received a long-term period of maintenance bevacizumab., Patients and Methods: This retrospective study included 104 patients who had already reached a progression-free survival (PFS) of at least 9 months., Results: Median overall survival and PFS were 30.7 and 15.1 months, respectively. The overall response rate was 83 %. Weight loss ≤5 %, ECOG PS = 0, or low number of metastatic sites seem to be predictive factors of good evolution. The incidence of bevacizumab-related adverse events appeared to be similar as the previous studies., Conclusion: Our findings show that there is a long-term survivor group whom the administration of bevacizumab resulted in a relevant prolongation of response without new safety signals. Due to the population heterogeneity, it was not possible to identify the standardised predictive factors.

Background: The WORLD07 project is a female-specific database to prospectively analyze the characteristics of Spanish women with lung cancer., Patients and Methods: We analyzed and compared lung cancer features in women with and without a family history of cancer/lung cancer., Results: Two thousand and sixty women were included: 876 had a family history of cancer (lung cancer, 34%) and 886 did not, with no significant differences between groups, except for smoking status (p=0.036). We found statistically significant correlations between epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and smoking status in patients with a family history of cancer (r=-0.211; p<0.001) and lung cancer (r=-0.176; p<0.001). Longer median overall survival was observed in women with a family history of cancer and lung cancer., Conclusion: Among Spanish women with lung cancer, a greater proportion were current smokers in those with a family history of cancer/lung cancer. There was a significant correlation between the presence of EGFR mutation and smoking., (Copyright© 2016 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. John G. Delinassios), All rights reserved.)

In 2011, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology started a joint project to establish recommendations on biomarker testing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer based on the current evidence. Most of these recommendations are still valid, but new evidence requires some aspects to be updated. Specifically, the recommendation about which biomarkers to test in which patients is being amended, and the best way to manage tumour samples and minimum requirements for biomarker test material are defined. Suitable techniques for testing for epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement are also reviewed, and a consensus is reached on which situations warrant re-biopsy.

Aim: Providing epidemiological data and treatment of anemia in lung cancer patients undergoing first-line chemotherapy., Methods: Epidemiological, observational, retrospective and multicenter study carried out at 30 sites throughout Spain., Results: The prevalence of anemia (hemoglobin [Hb] level <12 g/dl) was 18.3% and the incidence 80.7%. Mean Hb levels were 13.4 g/dl (95% Cl: 13.2-13.6) and 11.5 g/dl (95% Cl: 11.3-11.7) at starting and at the end of chemotherapy, respectively. Of the 294 patients with anemia, 174 (59.2%) were treated. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents were given to 90.2% patients, alone in 31.6% and combined iron in 39.7%, transfusion in 9.2% and iron and transfusion in 9.8%., Conclusion: These results suggest an appropriate and rational use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in the treatment of chemotherapy-associated anemia in lung cancer patients. [corrected].

Purpose: Signalling through the insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) is implicated in carcinogenesis, metastasis, and resistance to cytotoxic cancer therapies. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic role of IGF-1R expression in surgically resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and responses to IGF-1R tyrosine kinase inhibitor NVP-ADW742 in a panel of lung cancer cell lines., Methods: Insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) expression was evaluated by quantitative RT-PCR in 115 NSCLC samples and in a panel of 6 NSCLC cell lines. Cytotoxicity experiments with IGF-1R inhibitor and conventional systemic drugs such as paclitaxel in cell lines were realised., Results: Insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) was differentially expressed across histologic subtypes, with the lowest levels observed in squamous cell tumours. Median survival was longer in patients with squamous tumour histology expressing low IGF-1R levels. In multivariable analysis, ageing and high tumour stage were significant predictors of worse overall survival. The hazard of death was lower in patients with squamous histology and low IGF-1R gene expression. There was no correlation between IGF-1R expression and response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor in cell lines tested. However, combination drug treatment resulted in synergistically enhanced antiproliferative effects on several cell lines., Conclusions: These findings suggest that IGF-1R is a potential target for therapy in NSCLC patients. Combination therapies will have an important role in treatment.

The methylation status of the IGFBP-3 gene is strongly associated with cisplatin sensitivity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, we found in vitro evidence that linked the presence of an unmethylated promoter with poor response to radiation. Our data also indicate that radiation might sensitize chemotherapy-resistant cells by reactivating IGFBP-3-expression through promoter demethylation, inactivating the PI3K/AKT pathway. We also explored the IGFBP-3 methylation effect on overall survival (OS) in a population of 40 NSCLC patients who received adjuvant therapy after R0 surgery. Our results indicate that patients harboring an unmethylated promoter could benefit more from a chemotherapy schedule alone than from a multimodality therapy involving radiotherapy and platinum-based treatments, increasing their OS by 2.5 y (p = .03). Our findings discard this epi-marker as a prognostic factor in a patient population without adjuvant therapy, indicating that radiotherapy does not improve survival for patients harboring an unmethylated IGFBP-3 promoter.

Background: Based on the excellent results of the clinical trials with ALK-inhibitors, the importance of accurately identifying ALK positive lung cancer has never been greater. However, there are increasing number of recent publications addressing discordances between FISH and IHC. The controversy is further fuelled by the different regulatory approvals. This situation prompted us to investigate two ALK IHC antibodies (using a novel ultrasensitive detection-amplification kit) and an automated ALK FISH scanning system (FDA-cleared) in a series of non-small cell lung cancer tumor samples., Methods: Forty-seven ALK FISH-positive and 56 ALK FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened for ALK expression by two IHC antibodies (clone 5A4 from Novocastra and clone D5F3 from Ventana) and for ALK rearrangement by FISH (Vysis ALK FISH break-apart kit), which was automatically captured and scored by using Bioview's automated scanning system., Results: All positive cases with the IHC antibodies were FISH-positive. There was only one IHC-negative case with both antibodies which showed a FISH-positive result. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the IHC in comparison with FISH were 98% and 100%, respectively., Conclusions: The specificity of these ultrasensitive IHC assays may obviate the need for FISH confirmation in positive IHC cases. However, the likelihood of false negative IHC results strengthens the case for FISH testing, at least in some situations.

Lung cancer incidence is decreasing worldwide among men but rising among women due to recent changes in smoking patterns in both sexes. In Europe, the smoking epidemic has evolved different rates and times, and policy responses to it, vary substantially between countries. Differences in smoking prevalence are much more evident among European women reflecting the heterogeneity in cancer incidence rates. Other factors rather than smoking and linked to sex may increase women's susceptibility to lung cancer, such as genetic predisposition, exposure to sex hormones and molecular features, all of them linked to epidemiologic and clinical characteristics of lung cancer in women. However, biological bases of sex-specific differences are controversial and need further evaluation. This review focuses on the epidemiology and outcome concerning non-small cell lung cancer in women, with emphasis given to the Spanish population.

Objectives: Vorinostat or suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) is a novel histone deacetylase inhibitor with demonstrated antiproliferative effects due to drug-induced accumulation of acetylated proteins, including the heat shock protein 90. We prospectively studied the activity of vorinostat plus erlotinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with progression to tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Patients and Methods: We conducted this prospective, non-randomized, multicenter, phase I/II trial to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose, toxicity profile and efficacy of erlotinib and vorinostat. Patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations and progressive disease after a minimum of 12 weeks on erlotinib were included. The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat plus erlotinib was used as recommended dose for the phase II (RDP2) to assess the efficacy of the combination. The primary end point was progression-free-survival rate at 12 weeks (PFSR12w). Pre-treatment plasma samples were required to assess T790M resistant mutation., Results: A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the phase I-II trial. The maximum tolerated dose was erlotinib 150 mg p.o., QD, and 400mg p.o., QD, on days 1-7 and 15-21 in a 28-day cycle. Among the 25 patients treated at the RDP2, the most common toxicities included anemia, fatigue and diarrhea. No responses were observed. PFSR12w was 28% (IC 95%: 18.0-37.2); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 weeks (IC 95%: 7.43-8.45) and overall survival (OS) 10.3 months (95% CI: 2.4-18.1)., Conclusion: Full dose of continuous erlotinib with vorinostat 400mg p.o., QD on alternative weeks can be safely administered. Still, the combination has no meaningful activity in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients after TKI progression., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cisplatin plus oral vinorelbine, one of the standard treatments for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), is associated with a high rate of neutropenia, and a hemogram is performed on day 8. We analyzed the oncologists' opinions and the result of the hemogram on day 8 to address the question of whether this hemogram could be avoided., Materials and Methods: Fifty-eight chemotherapy-naive, advanced NSCLC patients were included. Each received intravenous doses of 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day 1 plus oral vinorelbine [60 mg/m(2) in the first cycle (80 mg/m(2) in subsequent cycles) on days 1 and 8], every 3 weeks, for a maximum of six cycles., Results: Out of 257 cycles analyzed, oral vinorelbine was administered on day 8 in 214 (83.2 %) and the dose was canceled in 6 cycles (2.3 %) due to hematological toxicity. On analyzing the patients to whom chemotherapy had been administered on day 8, based on medical opinion without the doctor knowing the hemogram result, we found that the cycle had been administered with a hemogram showing fewer than 1,500 × 10(6) neutrophils in only 3 of the 185 evaluable cycles [event rate of 1.6 %, with confidence interval 95 % = (0.34-4.67 %)]., Conclusion: The hemogram on day 8 can be avoided and oral vinorelbine administered in relative safety in patients with good performance status, when confirmed by the clinician's perception, thereby making this regimen more comfortable for the patient. This is the first prospective study to examine this issue.

The clinical and functional significance of RNA-interference machinery in lung cancer is poorly understood. Besides, microRNAs (miRNA) have the potential to serve both as biomarkers and therapeutic agents, by personalizing diagnosis and therapy. In this study, we investigated whether the expression levels of DICER1 and DROSHA, components of the RNA-interference machinery, can predict survival, and whether the miRNA expression profiles can differentiate histologic subtypes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Levels of DICER1, DROSHA and five different miRNAs were measured in NSCLC specimens (N = 115) by qRT-PCR assay and correlated with clinical outcomes. Low expression of DROSHA was associated with an increased median survival (154.2 versus 39.8 months, P = 0.016). Also, high DROSHA expression was associated with decreased median survival in the following subgroups: adenocarcinoma (P = 0.011), grade III tumors (P = 0.038) and low-stage patients (P = 0.014). In multivariate analyses, we found two independent predictors of reduced disease-specific survival: high DROSHA expression [hazards ratio = 2.24; P = 0.04] and advanced tumor stage (hazards ratio = 1.29, P = 0.02). In general, the overall tumor miRNA expression was downregulated in our cohort compared with normal tissues. Expression levels of hsa-let-7a (P = 0.005) and miR-16 (P = 0.003) miRNA were significantly higher in squamous cell carcinoma than in adenocarcinoma samples. This study supports the value of the expression profiling of the components of the miRNA-processing machinery in the prognosis of NSCLC patients, especially DROSHA expression levels. In addition, differential expression of miRNAs, such as hsa-let-7a and miR-16 may be helpful tools in the histologic subclassification of NSCLC.

Systemic chemotherapy (CT) with platinum-based doublets result in modest improvements in both overall survival (OS) and quality of life in good performance status patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, although substantial progress has been made in the therapeutic options currently available for these patients, the overall outcome remains poor. Maintenance therapy for patients who achieved at least stable disease after first-line treatment has been an area of intense investigation in recent years as a way of improving outcomes in metastatic NSCLC. Several alternative strategies for prolongation of initial treatment have been evaluated. These include the prolongation of the initial combination CT regimen until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or a predefined greater number of cycles, continuation with a lower intensity version of the first-line CT regimen or administration of a new active agent immediately after completion of the first-line therapy (switch-maintenance or early second-line therapy). Treatments that have been studied in randomized trials to date include CT, molecularly targeted agents, and immunotherapy approaches. Phase III trials have not revealed a survival benefit for extended first-line CT with combination regimens for more than 4-6 cycles. Nevertheless, early second-line therapy with pemetrexed in nonsquamous tumours and erlotinib have demonstrated to improve OS results, especially in select patient groups characterized by histology and/or molecular profile. This article reviews recent data with maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC and discusses the implications for routine patient care and future drug development., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) carrying epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations can now have specific treatment based on the result of biomarker analysis and patients with rearrangements of the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene will probably soon be able to. This will give them better quality of life and progression-free survival than conventional chemotherapy. This consensus statement was conceived as a joint initiative of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP), and makes diagnostic and treatment recommendations for advanced NSCLC patients based on the scientific evidence on biomarker use. It therefore provides an opportunity to improve healthcare efficiency and resource use, which will undoubtedly benefit these patients. Although this field is in continuous evolution, at present, with the available data, this panel of experts recommends that all patients with advanced NSCLC of non-squamous cell subtype, or non-smokers regardless of the histological subtype, should be tested for EGFR gene mutations within a maximum of 7 days from the pathological diagnosis. Involved laboratories must participate in external quality control programmes. In contrast, ALK gene rearrangements should only be tested in the context of a clinical trial, although the promising data obtained will certainly justify in the near future its routine testing in patients with no EGFR mutations. Lastly, routine testing for other molecular abnormalities is not considered necessary in the current clinical practice.

Background: Erlotinib has been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy when given as first-line treatment for Asian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of erlotinib compared with standard chemotherapy for first-line treatment of European patients with advanced EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC., Methods: We undertook the open-label, randomised phase 3 EURTAC trial at 42 hospitals in France, Italy, and Spain. Eligible participants were adults (> 18 years) with NSCLC and EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation in exon 21) with no history of chemotherapy for metastatic disease (neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy ending ≥ 6 months before study entry was allowed). We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive oral erlotinib 150 mg per day or 3 week cycles of standard intravenous chemotherapy of cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) or gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8). Carboplatin (AUC 6 with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) or AUC 5 with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2)) was allowed in patients unable to have cisplatin. Patients were stratified by EGFR mutation type and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 vs 1 vs 2). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received study drug (≥ 1 dose). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446225., Findings: Between Feb 15, 2007, and Jan 4, 2011, 174 patients with EGFR mutations were enrolled. One patient received treatment before randomisation and was thus withdrawn from the study; of the remaining patients, 86 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 87 to receive standard chemotherapy. The preplanned interim analysis showed that the study met its primary endpoint; enrolment was halted, and full evaluation of the results was recommended. At data cutoff (Jan 26, 2011), median PFS was 9·7 months (95% CI 8·4-12·3) in the erlotinib group, compared with 5·2 months (4·5-5·8) in the standard chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·37, 95% CI 0·25-0·54; p < 0·0001). Main grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rash (11 [13%] of 84 patients given erlotinib vs none of 82 patients in the chemotherapy group), neutropenia (none vs 18 [22%]), anaemia (one [1%] vs three [4%]), and increased amino-transferase concentrations (two [2%] vs 0). Five (6%) patients on erlotinib had treatment-related severe adverse events compared with 16 patients (20%) on chemotherapy. One patient in the erlotinib group and two in the standard chemotherapy group died from treatment-related causes., Interpretation: Our findings strengthen the rationale for routine baseline tissue-based assessment of EGFR mutations in patients with NSCLC and for treatment of mutation-positive patients with EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors., Funding: Spanish Lung Cancer Group, Roche Farma, Hoffmann-La Roche, and Red Temática de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)